/abdl/ - Adult Baby - Diaper Lover★

>>78727 (OP)

>Are companies like Pampers deliberately brainwashing parents into postponing potty-training?

Probably a little bit. They can't be too obvious about it, so if it's happening it's very subtle. They'd certainly be very happy if their market expanded to include the majority of elementary school kids though.

>Is it true that we could live actually completely diaper-free since there are parents practicing "EC" (Elimination Communication)?

I doubt it. You'd want diapers for at least the first 6 months - longer at night. The successful cases of "EC" are most likely outliers.

>>78736

you think most EC's are lying?

Could society live diaper free? In a perfect world scenario, I would say yes. Taking into account, reality, then I would say no. The best case scenario isn’t to eliminate diapers, it’s to move towards fully bio-degradable diapers. For both babies children and adults. Do the big baby diaper manufacturers want babies and children to remain in diapers longer? I would imagine they do, but I haven’t seen anything to indicate they are pushing society hard to do that. The notion of putting off potty training and keeping children in diapers longer, came about in the mid/late 80s, as disposable diapers rapidly became better during that period. It was pushed by ‘new age’ parenting ideas though, not by the manufacturers. So you can hardly blame them for riding that ideology to the bank. Now it’s the same type of ‘new age’ parenting ideology that’s pushing the opposite notion. Just like the opposite trend 30 years ago, the diving line for who these ideas are marketed toward in modern society is the poverty line. Which is of course ironic due to disposable diapers at one point being considered a genuine ‘luxury’ method of raising children.

I wouldn’t waste my time reading this book. It’s for people who buy gwyneth paltrow goop products, don’t believe in vaccination and probably eat ‘paleo’.

>>78740

No, I think you only hear about the success stories.

For every parent who gets their 2 week old baby to signal when they need the potty, there are probably dozens who try and fail.

>>78749

>Two week potty trainning

Is thia for real?

Sound as bad as commie potty trainning

>>78749

This. I would wager there are far more parents who get pissed and shat on so much they end up quietly switching back.

>>78727 (OP)

I dont think we could realistically live diaper free. Like some other here have said, successful EC is probably not the norm. I would assume that the majority who try it end up failing or switching back for other reasons. I do not have any source for this however.

Another thing I have heard in a couple different places is that "unrestricted voiding" (read as: diapers) is actually necessary for the normal development of a child's bladder and bowels. Potty training too early can actually have negative effects later on because the body just isnt physically developed enough when the training starts, and it causes long term damage. EC and unrestricted voiding are not necessarily mutually exclusive, but they do seem to go that way in many cases from what I can tell.

There are also the issues of night time, car rides, public places, etc, etc.

I would say that as a society that we could probably reduce the amount of diapers we use, but certainly not eliminate it. More specifically, I would say a very, very few could eliminate them, some could reduce them, and some, many, or even most probably would not realistically be able to go without them.

The bigger question is why you would even want to. Disposable diapers account for about 1% of the wast that goes into landfills. That is very insignificant. I want to say either paper waste or yard waste accounts for about 50% by comparison. Paper waste is easily recyclable, and yard waste is easily compostable. Eliminating these from our trash cans would be much, MUCH easier and have a much, much greater benefit.

Biodegradable diapers dont really gain us much either, unless you are composting them in your own back yard. Landfills have very, very little oxygen in them. That means that very little decomposition is happening inside them, regardless of if their contents are biodegradable or not. Things still break down, but not from oxygen breathing bacteria, and as a result the process is much, much slower.

>>tldr: We probably cant live totally diaper free, and we really have no reason to try either.

The existing economy makes an emerging dominance of EC almost entirely impossible. Unless we can return to single-earning households, PT age will continue to rise.

Although it has been noted that babies of all ages exhibit some form of continence. Would a world where everyone wears diapers actually have them be incontinent? I think the answer is no. Untrained toddlers know when they need to poop at least, and will push a load into their diaper not when their body decides, but when they decide that the feeling is bothering them. Some will simply stand up and drop the bomb, others will skirt off to a place out of sight to take care of their business. It is unclear at least to me weather or not the same happens with pee, especially after so long wearing diapers.

The question exists, if someone was raised to never leave diapers, would they exhibit forms of complete control as human instinct attempts to develop such? Would they grow to learn to use their diaper at convenient times, as in when the smell won't bother anyone. When would that habit develop? As toddlers seem unbothered by the scent of their brand.

>>78750

It sounds impossible.

Even at six months, I would press X to doubt.

>>78826

"Untrained toddlers know when they need to poop at least, and will push a load into their diaper not when their body decides, but when they decide that the feeling is bothering them. Some will simply stand up and drop the bomb, others will skirt off to a place out of sight to take care of their business."

I hadn't thought about that, but its a good point. I think it would be likely that a kid would eventually develop bladder awareness like that as well, although it might take longer. From an evolutionary point of view, if you are just constantly dribbling, or if you have zero awareness of when you go, there is a greater chance of attracting predators based on scent.

I also sometimes wonder what a world where diapers never stop would be like.

Another thing I have thought about is how potty training would work in space. If we ever build large space based structures as permanent homes for people, and they dont have some form of centrifuge for artificial gravity, accidents carry a much greater cost than they do on a planet. If you wet your pants on earth, you get a mop. In space, it goes EVERYWHERE. Into electronics, food, hair, eyes, etc. It would be virtually impossible to remove it without venting the area into space. Furthermore, using the potty in zero-g is far more complicated than on earth. a 2 year old probably wouldnt be able to comprehend it consistently. For that reason, I have theorized that potty training for kids born and raised in a zero-g environment would start much later, and probably take longer as well. Even after they were mostly trained, I think pull ups or something would be used for much longer than on earth "just in case" because of the disastrous results of peeing or pooping ones pants in space.

>>78740

…Outlier means something or someone outside of the norm. An exception, basically.

Outlier doesn't mean liar.

>>78727 (OP)

>Are companies like Pampers deliberately brainwashing parents into postponing potty-training?

Probably, in the US at least. There's tons of artificial markets here. Consider that turbotax lobbies congress to keep the tax system complicated so they can keep selling software. More diapers and pullups sold=higher revenue. I mean if the opioid industry will sell unnecessary opioids for profit then selling unnecessary diapers are pretty venial in comparison

>Is it true that we could live actually completely diaper-free since there are parents practicing "EC" (Elimination Communication)?

No, at least not outside the tropics. In a lot of indigenous tribal cultures nudity is moot so they just let their kids poop all over the jungle floor, then teach them to shit privately as they get older. In a society with clothes it seems pretty preposterous. Westerns traditionally swaddled infants and then used cloth diapers for toddlers. (It's also worth noting most western children regardless of sex traditionally wore dresses and gowns until about 5, when boys were "breached' and given their first pair of pants)

>>78867

I think ethics would prevent birthing in space until avoidable conditions such as that are minimized. Want to bang in space? Prepare to be in the fuge for nine months and to have your baby there for the foreseeable.

>>78767

I know I can't live without my nappy. I developed a fear of falling in the toilet at age 17, so ever since then I have worn adult sized nappies. I am filling one right now, and if I had to use a toilet, I would interrupt my message.

>>78913

>lobbies to keep the tax system complicated

A child that has learned how to multiply can do taxes, though.

>>78909

Not that person, but I think they meant that as in "the EC's are not really having as much success as they say they are", but you could be right.

>>78914

What if there wasn't a centrifuge? A really large one would actually be pretty difficult to make from a material point of view. It has to take a lot of stress to keep from tearing itself apart. What Im thinking about is a colony that lives entirely in zero g, that doesn't have a large centrifuge. They might have a few small ones, but not large enough to live in for an extended period of time, they would just be there for things you absolutely cant do without gravity. There's an interesting book called "The millennial Project" by Marshal T. Savage that describes an 8 step program to colonize the galaxy. Its actually a really enjoyable read if your into scifi and all that, as it reads like sci-fy, rather than a non-fiction book. One of the sections describes space based settlements that go without gravity entirely. Thats the kind of thing I was thinking about.

>>78962

I don't think a zero-g environment would be good for babies' physical development. They certainly couldn't expect to ever set foot on a planet after living their whole lives in microgravity.

Anyway, it's almost as easy to build a rotating habitat as it is to build a non-rotating one. By definition it only has to be strong enough to support 1g of acceleration (plus <100kPa of air pressure) at its perimeter. Sure, we couldn't build a Culture-style orbital, but current materials should be easily sufficient to support a radius of a hundred metres or more.

>>78961

No, I meant that successful cases of EC exist but are statistical outliers (i.e. not representative of the population average).

>>78916

The math is easy, but figuring out what math needs to be done is somewhat more complicated. In most European countries individual workers don't even need to calculate their own taxes - it's done automatically based on the information submitted by their employers.

>>78962

Then prepare to give birth to a braindead blob. No bones means its brain will be compressed and it'll die during childbirth. Without gravity, a C-Section will cause numerous sanitary issues and flying liquids would fry something.

Either way, the child would be an amorphous blob and not live very long.

>>78990

I'm sure that safe and effective medical procedures in microgravity are entirely possible. We just don't have as much expertise in that area because 99.99999% of our species live on Earth. All of our medical procedures have been developed with gravity in mind.

>>78961

I really think the guy I replied to simply wasn't familiar with the term "outlier" and assumed it must mean liar since it sounds similar.

>you think most EC's are lying?

just makes so much more sense as a response if he read the relevant sentence as:

>The successful cases of "EC" are most likely liars.

>>78990

>>78972

>>78962

>>78993

I hadn't even thought of how a C-section would work, or any other medical procedure for that matter. I also didn't realize that centrifuges of a useful size could be built that easily. Now I'm thinking that we might eventually end up with a hybrid type of system. Have a very large volume of zero-g space available for the masses and every day living, but also have a significant, but not nearly as large, living area in the centrifuges. That way specialized activities like surgery and child birth could be done in gravity, while the bulk of daily living and activity is done in zero-g, because you can create a much larger habitable area for the same resources if you don't need to have gravity.

I could definitely see pregnancy taking place in a region with artificial gravity, or at the very least a significant portion of it. The final stages of the pregnancy would definitely be in gravity, as would the actual birthing process. Then the child (and parents) would spend a good deal of time exclusively in gravity, and eventually the child would be introduced to the zero-g environments over time. Possibly around the same age as potty training starts? I still think that some type of pullup would be common place as a just in case tactic for longer than it is used on earth if the child is going to be in a zero-g environment at all.

I also think that we will continue to get better at preventing the deterioration we experience in micro-gravity as time goes on. But a couple hours a day in gravity would always certainly be useful.

>>79199

>I also didn't realize that centrifuges of a useful size could be built that easily.

Just think of it like building a circular, self-supporting bridge. In fact it should be easier because both the structure and the forces on it are more symmetrical.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_longest_suspension_bridge_spans

Also you don't need a full 1g of gravity. You could probably get most of the benefits at just 0.5g or less.

In fact, I think the main problem with space habitats is not structural strength but rather protecting the inhabitants from radiation and high-velocity debris. You could make a large 1g centrifuge out of lightweight aluminum sheets and steel cables, but that wouldn't be enough to stop gamma radiation. The best bet would probably be to hollow out an asteroid and spin that up.

>>81152

>wouldn't mess herself

coward

I doubt Oampers realistically wants parents to delay potty training. There would be some marginal profit in having kids wear diapers longer but it's probably not worth the bad press, and they could get the exact same results from just encouraging more people to become parents or have more kids.

I think EC is mostly bullshit for parents who want to seem as if they put more effort into parenting than anyone else. Like sending their toddlers to special classes to get them into school faster.

But then again, I guess humans must have done something before inventing diapers. I wonder how other apes handle that sort of thing

The feeling I get from EC is that it's more intensive effort of the parent than any wilful ability by the child, because the parent has a vigilant clockwork routine on feeding, nursing, and paying attention to their child they can know from the smallest hints when the results of ingestion will be revisited upon them. The types of parents that seem to get EC to work are the mothers that micromanage their infants and have the time and money to be with them 24/7 until normal potty training kicks in. To successfully do EC you have to fulltime parent for 3 years without a night off. And you have to have all the environmental factors go with you too, child gets ill EC probably breaks down, going on a car ride well you need someone else to drive so you can EC and no highways because the kid is going to go before the next exit and so on. Not to mention the attitude that "a few accidents now and then is normal with EC" attitude I've seen, basically admitting "your kid won't actually be potty trained"