Caregivers, Mommies, Daddies, adult babies, middles, babyfur, diaperfur, and all other Bigs and littles discuss relationship dynamics, have open group conversation, share experienced advice, and exchange ideas to help one another grow in knowledge. (Age 18 or older only permitted)
Note: Personal ads are NOT permitted in this section.
Forum rules: This section of the site is for open, group conversation and public discussion topics within the community.

Additional Helpful Tips:
  • General advice and tips are all over the site. Please ask specific questions or for specific input.
  • We suggest only asking one question per post for the best answer opportunities.
  • See our forum FAQ for questions we no longer accept due to the frequency of them being asked.
  • Go to DateCGL to find a special someone, partner, to date, or any other type of special connection.
  • User avatar
  • User avatar
#50304
Hey Everyone,

I'm going to breach a subject that I hope provokes a critical but positive discussion about the DDlg community. Question is as follows:

Given that many of these relationships are centered around the role-playing of a toddler or infant, do you think that there is a moral difference between a little's and care-giver's fantasy to experience "you know what" during age-regression?

Link:
Hide post links
Show post links
#50308
Ah, I think maybe you're in the wrong community. You're literally wanting a "positive discussion" about how you want people to admit to wanting to be r-aped as a child or wanting to r-ape a child. That is not of our community. There is no positive discussion that can be had about that. That is also, FYI, a topic against our rules. So, this is as positive as you're going to get.

Littles aren't wishing they were being r-aped as children.
Caregivers aren't wishing they were r-aping biological children.

Nobody correctly identifying themselves within the CGL community really wishes they had a romance with a biological child.

So, your moral comparisons are based off of misconceptions and misunderstandings about the community. We are using parental and family labeling as a simple way to represent an atypical type of care and comparison we have for our partners, as well as interest in hobbies, activities, and reactions outside of our biological age-range expectations.

We are not roleplaying for in-cest kink.

So, do I believe a Caregiver is living out their dark, secret pedo-philic desires in a twisted legal way?
No.

People who are doing that are not from this community. They are not actual Caregivers interested in CGL. They are pedos.

I'm a Mommy and I can tell you that I have absolute zero interest in biological children. They do not attract me. I do not get aroused by the thought of sensually interacting with one. I do not have fantasies of being with a kid. That's disgusting; repulsive.

Caregivers are not fantasizing about kids. The end of that. The end.

If you think otherwise, please deactivate your account and never return here. Yes, I'm serious.

I searched the forum because this has been brought up a couple of times. I think this post answers things a bit more clearly for you:

JuneStar wrote:
2 years ago
Honestly, you're probably thinking way too much about it.

True Caregiver/little dynamics are in no way related to child involvement.

child involvement is the attraction to children. This includes everything in regards to the person being a child--physically and mentally. Not just a "childlike" personality or behaviors but everything involved with a person being a child (physical and mental).

CG/l involves a "little girl" or "little boy" (typically) but that person is biologically over the age of 18. He/She is likely physically and mentally matured but has a childlike wonder about her or just simply enjoys childlike activities. It doesn't actually make him/her a child. He/She is physically and mentally still an adult man/woman even if he/she pretends he/she isn't sometimes.

If you're looking for someone (adult art or in-person) that is UNDER 18 then, sure, maybe you are actually into child involvement since under 18 is typically considered a child in most countries.

If you're fantasizing about having sexual contact with a child then, yes, you very well may be a pedophile.

If you're fantasizing about being a child then I don't feel like that verges into child involvement at all. There is no way you can actually become a child, and even if you could do that physically--you would likely remain mentally intact as an adult.

It's like, for a Caregiver: If you're looking for an adult man/woman who likes acting silly and, at times, downright childish then you're still looking for an ADULT. They are still mentally an adult, even if they want to pretend they aren't.

If you're fantasizing about a woman (with developed breasts, hips, thighs, height, weight, or other features that you would attribute to being an adult female) playfully acting childlike then that isn't a form of child involvement. If you're fantasizing about a man (with facial or bodily hair, grown/matured genitalia, any form of muscular tone, average height, etc.) playfully acting childlike then that isn't a form of child involvement.

If you're fantasizing about your partner having adult relations with an actual child (not a person that LOOKS childlike but is simply acting childlike) then maybe you need to take a step back and re-evaluate where you are with kink because that's verging into not-okay territory. You need to draw your mental line. Is the person roleplaying or is the person actually a child, you know?

Link:
Hide post links
Show post links
Pacifiers: YES or NO?!

Pacis are AMAZING!! Mine keeps me calm in all situ[…]

I think that would be really great.... it’s […]

Xmas Coloring Contest!

Here’s mine :yay: https://i.imgur.com/0LXl[…]

Coke or Pepsi?

I agree I mostly drink water and (apple) juice. An[…]