Caregivers, Mommies, Daddies, adult babies, middles, babyfur, diaperfur, and all other Bigs and littles discuss regression, 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.
► Read more...
  • User avatar
  • User avatar
  • User avatar
  • User avatar
  • User avatar
  • User avatar
  • User avatar
#51116
A biological parent/child relationship has nothing to do with traditional BDSM despite the parent being seen as authoritative over the child. The parent is not necessarily dominant, but is simply in a position of welfare over the child, who is seen as simply immature and not being capable of taking care of their full needs, growth, and development. CGL traditionally mimics a parent/child relationship to some degree but among unrelated adults, adding in it's own version of romance and possibly sexuality.
Could that mean that it's possible that two biological adults could have a healthy, functional Caregiver/little relationship together and not actually be actively engaging in BDSM (primarily Dom/sub roles or clear Dominance/submission)? What if both parties consider themselves to be asexual/nonsexual and do not engage in activities such as "punishment" but do individually engage in regression and partner parenting? What's your personal opinion? Can you see a different viewpoint than your own that could possibly make sense and also be "right"?

Link:
Hide post links
Show post links
#51141
This is one of those chicken/egg discussions that there will possibly never be a firm answer one way or another. It also frustrates some to no end that the opposite group asserts their opinion. I'm in more of the live and let live middle ground :)

My opinion is that recognizing the dynamic has its roots in the BDSM world is important, whether you choose to engage in a strict power exchange or not.

The thing to understand is BDSM does not require sexual involvement, so there's no rule that says CGl must either. It's about trust, communication, and respective roles, however those are defined by the participants. Just like sex is not required in BDSM, neither is punishment, though that one seems to be a bit more common, lol. That's why DDlg/CGl is the lighter side of D/s because it tends to focus on nuturing/being nurtured.

Because of how I first learned of DDlg and how I practice it, it's difficult for me to separate the two (CGl and BDSM). I think, honestly, that the backlash against seeing it as BDSM (and therefore arguing it's origin and premise) is due to cultural connotation as BDSM being dark/evil/bad/deviant/etc. or the "eww, icky!" sort of knee-jerk response we've been taught implicitly or subconsciously through media, etc.

There are a LOT of misconceptions out there and that's what the arguments and misgivings are about, ultimately: the stigma others have placed upon it that we may not even realize we're carrying until we find ourselves knee-deep and a living contradiction to what we've been taught.

Um... That sorta turned into a novella, lol ... But as I hope is apparent, I've given this topic a lot of thought.

Link:
Hide post links
Show post links
#51189
“That's why DDlg/CGl is the lighter side of D/s because it tends to focus on nuturing/being nurtured.”

That is a false analogy.

Just because similarities are present between two dynamics does not link them up or relate them. BDSM and CGL are two different lifestyles, communities, that can be completely severed off from one another and neither would really be affected.

One of our main arguments is that there is a false assumption that a Caregiver is put in a position power and a Little is the one who yields.

The truth is that in most relationships, Vanilla relationships included, there is exchange of power and there are roles assumed. The nature of relationships is asymmetric, making it so that one party commonly brings to the table what another party lacks, and viceversa. Oftentimes decisions are made unanimously, but on other occasions one party is the one deciding for the whole.

We see the power vested in Caregivers as a sign of the Little trusting that the Caregiver will make decisions in best interest of both parties. While, on the other hand, a Dominant would make decisions with gratification and pleasure involved, and a Submissive would follow in order to please (does not have to be sexual, but surely has more sexual connotation).

There can be nurturing in BDSM, but it really isn’t the same type of nurturing a parent would give to their child.

Anyway, we simply cannot see how BDSM and CGL are inherently connected, and therefore, CGL relationships do not need to involve BDSM at all.

We will do our homework and try to study the roots of AB/DL, hopefully we can confirm or deny that CGL is rooted in BDSM. As far as we know, there have been accounts of ABDLs from the 1950’s that had no real involvement in any sort of BDSM, but we will have to confirm that!

Link:
Hide post links
Show post links
#51248
yes and no! lol....
Things can be however you each want them to be. It can switch to for periods of time. Depends on the type of person and how you two interact with one another. Nothing is ever set in stone.

I am in a CGL relationship. But there is some times where it's fun to have a bdsm aspect mixed for times to try new things? For an example! I love to be tickled! But I also like to be helpless so we use 4 point cuffs while she tickles me! so there is a bdsm type activity!

If you act naughty and she swats your but? I guess you called it a role play of bdsm as well.

I guess it depends on what level of bdsm your saying! Locking you in a straight jacket in a caged crib with a ball gag pacifire in your mouth, with a diaper is kinda a huge leap from the above !

The real question you should be asking is! If I'm in a CGL relationship what are my boundriers I consider to be BDSM and are not comfertable with! :paci: <---sucking on a pacifire given to you to suck on! could be considered bdsm to an extent! get me?

Link:
Hide post links
Show post links
#51620
I just want to make it clear that if it weren't for the bdsm community abdls would most likely not be as accepted. It is considered a sexual fixation...a adult interest all on it's own. The label "paraphilia" comes to mind and is still how it is labeled by experts. It is a adult interest for diapers, diaper wearers and diaper wearing. To separate it from Anything sexual seems fantastical to me. I have no stance on it. I don't personally believe there's any problem with ABDL, but I do have a problem with so many trying to claim it isn't sexual for most and isn't connected with any adult interest when it's Actually labeled a paraphilia. So is voyeurism and exhibitionism by the way, but both are accepted as ok (with consent) within the bdsm community. I expect it to be different for everyone, though too. Some might not be sexual. That doesn't change the origin or definition.

Link:
Hide post links
Show post links
#51637
I think it is possible, the relationship itself can not be related to BDSM, but the whole nature of being "little" is. My partner and I's "little" relationship is non-sexual and has always been that way, but it definitely is a power-play dynamic which makes it inherently kink

Link:
Hide post links
Show post links
#51701
I believe CGL and BDSM are two completely separate ideas that can overlap in some ways. Someone can be in a BDSM relationship with no CGL qualities. Someone else can be in a CGL relationship with no BDSM qualities, and a third person may be in a relationship with elements of both. It's just the preferences of the individuals involved. In no way does CGL imply it must be part of BDSM. It's more like coincidence when they overlap.

I could see the other side of it, though. Maybe I'm wrong and CGL is inherently a part of BDSM, and people who participate in CGL but not BDSM are anomalies. That is not how I've come to understand it, however.

fyrenraine - Why do you have a problem with people who claim diapers aren't inherently sexual? Your comments lead me to wonder if you don't fully understand what regression is, or what being a little is. The fact that "most people" consider diapers to be a sexual fixation doesn't make it true. Labels do not equal truth.

Link:
Hide post links
Show post links
#51988
This certainly is an interesting discussion!

I see it on Tumblr too but in "DNI warfare". There is a community of age regressors which actively seek to separate and differentiate themselves from the bdsm/cgl/ageplay/abdl/kink community. They see their experience of age regression (agere, cglre) as fundamentally distinct from the experience kinksters have with age "play" and cgl.

The truth is somewhere in between I think.

Whenever we tag or label human needs, emotions, personalities etc. we end up oversimplifying reality. All those feelings which we now either identify as falling under bdsm or not or under ageplay or not or under cglre or not - these are all human feelings and expressions of needs and desires - and would exist even if all these labels were completely non existent.

How you group them is partially arbitrary. That is what the human mind does, it groups things, and our need to find a group we can belong to which feels safe, welcoming, and in accordance with our values and core beliefs will impact the way we perceive and define groups and ourselves.

But labels are descriptors only, they are not the actual reality. Reality is often more complex than how we tend to describe it.

Sorry for the philosophical part here.

We tend to define ourselves by seeking differences or similarities with others. This way we also find friends, a potential partner etc. Although it is very human to do so, in the end - you are unique. There is only one you. And you can take from bdsm what you like, from ageplay, cgl, cglre, abdl, the grocery store, just pick what you like, and drop the rest.

So I'm sort of sex repulsed, mostly, not always, which is why I like cglre as a tag to avoid triggers online. But in real life I hang out in the abdl scene where I have many little friends (the abdl scene here is not at all that sexual, ie sex is not even allowed at parties, so I think internet also distorts a lot by oversexualising everything) and I also enjoy restraints in a nonsexual way (for relaxation & fun). So I don't need anyone to tell me "no you are not allowed to feel that because we as a group don't" or "you are supposed to feel this because we as a group feel it this way".

Well, I feel what I feel and I don't feel what I don't feel, and this is valid. Regardless of any label or group I do or do not belong to. No matter what anyone says.

Sorry, rant, but I hope this helps others who also struggle with all these definitions online. I'm a peg which don't fit into any category. You know, when you have this puzzle and some piece from somewhere just doesn't fit in...

:pacy:

Link:
Hide post links
Show post links
#51989
And I do believe ppl exist who do not feel sexual arousal when wearing diapers but instead it just makes them feel younger or relaxed. Not everything people enjoy doing is about sex and even if it is sometimes sexual it isn't always so (I know this from abdl friends who also wear diapers for comfort or regression) - one experience does not exclude the other

Link:
Hide post links
Show post links
Why Is It Such A Stigma to be like Us

Note: Our pronouns are they/them, and we refer to […]

Making my own adult onesie

Yeah, tanky, it was a fun little experience and I […]

Littlespace has been an integral part of our liv[…]

Mistress or Ma'am. my CG is not very comfortable w[…]