We absolutely love the feel of a warm, wet diaper.
The smell of baby powder drives us wild.
Step into our homes and you’ll probably find diapers galore - and not a baby in sight.
With all of its many parallels to infancy, it can sometimes escape those who don’t understand it: infantilism has nothing to do with actual children.
It is because members of the community observe a code of honor - 18+ - that keeps it that way.
It’s important to understand that infantilism has nothing to do with actual children.
It’s not hard to understand why vanillas might be quick to lump ageplaying in with pedophilia.
People who don’t understand what headspace is naturally struggle to wrap their head around concepts like ‘little space’, ‘pup space’, etc.
Diaper fetish is simple word association; to them, diapers and onesies and baby bottles and pacifiers… those all represent children.
A ‘kink’ or ‘fetish’, to most people, represents sex.
Put it all together and you have something most people can’t help but misunderstand.
Trying to explain to a vanilla that adults on the ‘AB’ side of ABDL don’t want to be with children, they want to be children - that’s a hard concept for most people to grasp.
Why on earth would a grown adult want to pee on himself, suck this thumb, or drink from a baby bottle?
Then add in DDLG - that first ‘D’ stands for “daddy,” you know, and the ‘LG’ for ‘little girl’ - and now you have a (usually older) male who is fetishizing his ‘little girl’ - and she’s ‘little girl’ enough to need a diaper?!
(That the so-called ‘little girl’ is a consenting adult over the age of 18 doesn’t really matter to those to whom ‘headspace' is a foreign concept).
Mommies? Daddies? Babies? Diapers?
Surely these must be adults who are fetishizing infants!
The mistake is easy to make, if we’re being honest, and the misconceptions should be easy to understand.
Littlespace is headspace.
Even other kinksters sometimes misunderstand ageplaying.
So-called ‘headspace fetishes’ make up just a fraction of all of the kinks in existence.
Littlespace? Pupspace? Subspace?
Those whose fetishes are less cerebral often misunderstand the part where littlespace is headspace.
They sometimes let what they see - little gear and the like - define the fetish as something that it isn’t.
In my years of blogging about ABDL and age playing I’ve spoken to many people in our community who have ‘cross fetishes’ - think babyfurs, padded pups, and leather babies, for example - and who feel like they have sometimes had to hide their ‘little side’ when attending conventions and other events where their other fetish is the primary focus.
Some furries, for example, feel that other furries can be openly hostile toward babyfurs, believing that the diaper and little gear create a connection to pedophilia that they’re not comfortable with.
The same is true in some pup circles, where padded pups feel that they are looked on by other pups as something of a - well, different breed.
For some of those who would denigrate the diaper-wearing members of their kink communities, it’s truly nothing more than kink shaming - a misguided belief that their kink is superior to all others.
For others, though, it’s a visceral reaction to what they legitimately see as a connection between their fetish and actual children. They just don’t understand, and don’t know any better.
To their credit, they’re trying to keep children 100% out of their community.
That’s good.
Unfortunately, they - as with so many vanillas - don’t fully understand what ABDL is in the first place, and they’re prone to allowing their first impressions of the fetish to color their view of it.
That’s bad.
With a kink that is so easy for vanillas, and even other kinksters, to link to pedophilia, we should have a keen interest in keeping things 18+.
Sometimes, our community’s history has shown, we don’t.
Even worse: those in the ABDL community whose arrests for child pornography, child abuse, and other sex crimes make for an attention-grabbing news headline.
I’ve been chronicling the worst our community has to offer since almost the beginning of this blog. Keep reading to check out some of the highlights…
Sex offender check
In announcing my #Abysitter1Mil Photo Contest in 2018, I made it a point to mention that the contest would be limited to participants 18+, and that proof of age may be required in some cases.
After that, several people linked me to a rant that's making the rounds on Tumblr, in which a (presumably underage) little bashes those who advertise "18+" on their Tumblr pages. The little isn't happy with this - she believes that it is foolish, since to her diapers are not sexual in any way, shape, or form. They also believes that it is age discrimination, and just plain wrong.
That argument is certainly nothing new to me. I was posting "18+" before it was a regular thing in the ageplay world, and I am old enough to remember a time when the "18+" people were actually in the minority in our community.
Over the years I've seen lots of people advocate for those under 18 being allowed to be a part of our community. Debates have raged over whether diaper companies that market ABDL diapers to children, or feature children wearing their products, are in the right, or in the wrong. I've gotten messages from people asking me to stop pushing "my moral code" onto others. I've even had people invite me to chats where I'm being slammed for being the "18 Plus Nazi" - by people that I had previously respected. It sucks.
I've gotten emails and texts from people who want to debate me - they live in a state or country where the age of consent is younger than 18, so why can't they meet up for some diaper fun? They think I'm some sort of patriotic American trying to force our way of life on them.
I've even heard people adamantly suggest that companies that use minors in their diaper catalogs aren't breaking the law, and that those companies should be praised for helping young people to know wearing diapers is acceptable, and even something they should be proud of.
The list goes on and on. And on. And on.
I could simply continue to push my views - essentially that the TBDL (under 18) and the ABDL (18 and over) communities should be distinct from one another, and that diaper photos should be 18+ for the entire community's protection - on everyone.
Instead, I am going to introduce you to 25 diaper fetishists who appear to have disagreed with me.
Fifteen of them are serving a combined 288 years in prison.
Afterward, you can decide...
EAGLE SCOUT: 11 YEARS
Take the story of the Kentucky Eagle Scout, Robert Emmanuel Evans.
Robert was 19 years old when he was sentenced for trading child pornography with a younger teen, a thirteen year-old from Texas.
Robert and the younger teen traded diaper pictures over the internet, including photos of young children being changed that had been uploaded to family sharing websites.
Robert also sent the Texas boy pictures of himself in diapers.
In the article linked above, U.S. Attorney Kerry Harvey mentions that Robert is one of the youngest people he's ever prosecuted for child pornography - and that "the sentencing follows a national trend of teens and young adults facing child porn charges."
"I don't know that there are any well-accepted theories to why that is," he said. "Younger folks are just more comfortable with the technology. When their desire is to interact with other young people, they know how to use technology and use the language of other young people."
And in the cases of ABDLs, that language - "padded", "crinkling", "loaded", etc. - is a language that non-ABDLs and the law don't fully understand.
"These images were not pornographic, but this individual used those images for sexual gratification. There is a thin slice of our society who do not react normally to those kinds of images," U.S. Attorney Harvey is quoted as saying.
Robert Emmanuel Evans pleaded guilty in 2011 and was sentenced to 11 years, 3 months in prison.
He is scheduled to be released in December 2020, when he'll be 30. At that time he begins a period of lifetime supervision.
Is this lifetime of shame all for swapping pictures Facebook refuses to delete because they're not officially considered "pornography", and for sending a photo of himself, wearing a diaper, to a teen?
Pedophile... or naive teen? Who the fuck knows.
I do know this, though:
Robert could, honestly, be any number of people in our community.
Do you get it yet?
In the pictures you download and send/receive: 18+.
In your communications on the internet (and, if you're intelligent, especially in real life): 18+.
Anything less could get you arrested.
Truth be told, we have no way of knowing what the photographs shared between the two actually contained. It is mentioned that they clearly showed genitalia during diaper changes, and for all I know these could have been more pornographic than the article lets on. It could have been hard-core child pornography, and its description sanitized for reporting to the public.
The point is, those in our community who have themselves convinced that it's okay to download and/or share actual baby pictures - you've probably seen this at least once - could be viewed by the public and law enforcement as using "innocent pictures of children for sexual gratification," and find themselves on the wrong side of the law.
It's hard enough to explain that photos of adults in diapers isn't related to pedophilia - let's not blur the lines any more with photos of minors in diapers, okay?
And those who talk to minors, or share diaper pictures with minors, believing the conversation and/or photos to be legal because after all, it's just diapers and not sex, or diaper pictures and not full nudity - well, they may find themselves on the wrong side of the law, as well.
The younger person in the story above has long since turned 18. It's likely he'll become a member of our community, if he hasn't already. And once he turns 18, he's 100% legal.
The point that I'm forever trying to make - that those younger than 18 can wait until they reach that magic age, and that those older than 18 should have a hands off policy until a young person is at least 18, is a valid one.
You can trust that anyone who tells you differently is definitely no Eagle Scout.
Don't listen to the opinions of cretins trying to preserve the status quo - just keep it 18 and you can't go wrong.
SISSY BABY BEN: 20 YEARS
Who remembers Sissy Baby Ben from my blog?
Ben appeared on the blog between 2010 and 2012. He contributed photos - mainly diaper selfies and some diaper/skirt selfies.
Ben was looking for a daddy or mommy, preferably one with a nursery, so that he could explore his little side. He asked me to post his email address in case anyone wanted to get in touch with him.
Ben's real name wasn't Ben. In fact, when Ben emailed me, it was from an email address that included his real name. A quick Google search of his name and/or email address (I can't remember which, now, but I often do a search to confirm that the pics I've been given are legit 18+) told me way more than I'd be willing to bet Ben wanted anyone to know. I found a news page that had been published about Ben from his high school graduation. There was news from his college, too. These articles listed his parents names, and the names of several other important people in his life - teachers, siblings, and more.
Another story showed Ben in a program as a senior in high school. The photo caption gave the names of nearly every other student in his program. And mentioned what college he was going to be going off to, and what his major would be.
I remember being very concerned that this innocent little dude was basically putting his whole life out there for the world to see, just by giving out his email address. I know that the vast majority of people in our community are good people with good intentions, but I've been contacted by too many young guys with a controlling daddy (or significant other) threatening blackmail to not be wary of someone putting his real info out on the web...
I asked Ben about it, and I went over some of the concerns that I had. He agreed that his life would be ruined if his diaper secret got out in his hometown, and we changed his name for the purposes of the blog. I also suggested that he make a dedicated ABDL email, and he did so.
I know that some of you had the chance to talk to Ben, because more than a few of you hit me up and asked me if I had any news on him after he stopped responding to your messages. I figured that it was the old binge/purge cycle. It turns out I was wrong.
Ben's real name, as I found out in 2011 and some of you found out in 2014, was Brady.
I recently saw Brady's name as a suggestion on LinkedIn - they'd trolled my email for people I may know based on email messages I'd gotten in the past, and were suggesting I invited Brady to join the network.
I typically keep my LinkedIn to professional contacts, but still - I hadn't heard from Brady in years. I started to email him, but something made me Google his name, instead.
That's when I learned that, in January of 2014, Brady had been arrested on charges of child pornography.
WTF.
It was reported that Brady had been trading pornography through email and text messages during 2013.
He was caught as a result of a larger investigation into child porn, which means there were likely other arrests - in fact, anyone who traded child pornography with Brady was likely arrested, as well.
From a news story published in 2014:
WEST BRANCH (KWWL) -
A former daycare worker accused of distributing thousands of images of child pornography pleaded guilty in federal court in Cedar Rapids on Monday. 22-year-old Brady [Removed] admitted at a plea hearing that between June and December of 2013 he distributed child pornography that was transmitted to him through the Internet and cell phone messages. In his plea agreement, he admitted that he had approximately 20,000 images and 900 videos containing child pornography. [Removed] faces a mandatory sentence of five years in prison with a possible maximum sentence of 20 years. He also could face a $250,000 fine. He will remain in the custody of the United States Marshal Service until he is sentenced. [Removed] was an employee with Community Day Care's Kids Club.
We don't know anything about the kinds of images Brady was convicted of distributing.
It was reported that these were not images he'd taken at the day care where he worked, but nothing else about them were reported.
What does seem clear is that he was collecting a mass of images - more than 20,000 pictures and 900 videos.
Was this so-called 'diaper porn'? (It's entirely possible it was not. But it may have been.)
Brady is now in federal prison. He plead guilty to a single charge against him and was sentenced to the maximum sentence: 20 years.
Brady has a release date of August 27, 2031.
Brady told me that he'd been an avid reader of my blog. Which means he had read the Hall of Shame Series that I do, where I detail the arrests of ABDL's (and others who may or may not be ABDL but who use diaper discipline on actual children).
It kills me to think that this kid is in prison for twenty years.
And when I think of the reason behind his sentence, it pains me. Seriously.
It's likely either one of two things: the kid we knew as "Ben" was legit into child pornography, simply hiding his actual preferences from those of us who are open about our "18+" requirements.
Or "Ben" was just a dumb kid, trading diaper pictures, and didn't care if the pics he was receiving, downloading, and sending were 18 and up, or any age.
There is a reason everything I publish says "18+" - and that's the same reason I urge my blog readers to do the same.
The internet is filled with stories of diaper fetishists who didn't think 18+ was for real.
Most are serving time in prison now.
Some are hard-core child sex predators.
Others are people who got caught up in a diaper fetish far out of their control, leading them to collect photos of children under 18, or even meet up with children under 18 who shared their fetish for diapers.
Still others are people who hooked up with another ABDL, or tried to, and found themselves ensnared in the long arm of the law.
It's hard to know what's in a person's heart. But as you read through the collection of "Hall of Shame" stories, below, try to determine which of those listed are child sex abusers, and which are diaper fetishists who - for lack of a better term - fucked up.
Then, after you finish, try to decide if it matters - to you, or to the law.
I'll have some additional comments at the end of this blog entry…
SCHOOL’S OUT: 50 YEARS COMBINED
Here's the story of 28 year-old Randy Ray Wesson and 17-year-old Ricardo Jhavid Lugo, who were arrested after Wesson posed as the father of Lugo to enroll him in school - so Lugo could sneak diaper pictures of younger children to satisfy the lusty urges of both.
The two met on Instagram - both had ABDL-related accounts there, police say. Some of you with Instagram accounts may have spotted images from them. The were initially being investigated after a tip about a video showing sex between a man and a boy came into police. The case had hit a lull, however, when authorities learned that Wesson (left) had enrolled Lugo (right) in elementary school using phony documents.
These two were hoarding thousands of diaper images when their home was raided. Lugo, police say, was taking photos of boys at the school, often communicating with Wesson via text as he transmitted the images to Wesson throughout the school day.
Wesson admitted to police that he possessed about 42,000 illegal pornographic images and had molested more than 100 children.
How many of them were others in our community, lured to Wesson through social media using the common bond of a diaper fetish?
Lugo was 18 when he was sentenced to 20 years in prison in November 2014.
Wesson was 30 when he was sentenced to 30 years, plus 10 years of post release supervision, after a guilty plea as part of a plea bargain.
Three years before his arrest, a mother had reported him to Sea Life Aquarium after he picked up her four year-old son without permission. The police reviewed the case, but no charges were filed.
FROM CELL PHONE TO CELL: EIGHT YEARS
Phillip Gabaldon-Mondragon, of Albuquerque, New Mexico, was 25 when he was sentenced to eight years in prison and lifetime supervision for creating child pornography.
He had already been sentenced to probation, but a police officer spotted him driving overnight - a violation of his probation conditions - and found him in possession of a cell phone. A forensic search of that cell phone turned up additional images of child pornography, and probation became prison.
Mandragon admitted he has a diaper fetish, as well as a fetish for baby urine.
"This was a particularly disturbing case," Assistant Attorney General Tony Long told KOAT news. "The individual has admitted to law enforcement that he has numerous fetishes involving babies."
Investigators found soiled baby diapers during their search - no word on whether the diapers had been soiled by Mondragon.
DROP DEAD FRED
Frederick Lowe was a 56 year-old lawyer and volunteer basketball coach when, in December 2015, he was arrested for child abuse and possession of child pornography.
It is alleged that Coach Lowe was into diaper discipline - and was using it on a sixteen year-old boy, a member of the team he was coaching.
"The parents told the basketball coach that Lowe had called the 16 year-old quote a bad boy, and made him take his clothes off and wear a diaper."
Sheriff Bob Gualtieri said in a news conference Saturday that Lowe is accused of making the boy strip and wear a diaper until he urinated on himself. Lowe would then take off the diaper, smell it and wipe the boy's genitals, Gualtieri said.
There were five occasions that Lowe called the student a "bad boy" and made him wear the diaper as punishment for acting out at school, Gualtieri said.
The boy told his parents in July and stopped going to Lowe's house. His parents didn't report it to law enforcement to avoid embarrassment, Gualtieri said. The student returned to Lowe's house in late July without telling his parents after Lowe offered to pay him $20 to do house chores.
It is alleged that Lowe threatened to throw the boy off the basketball team if he didn't allow the sexual contact to continue. Detectives found video pornography of children as young as nine years old, according to news reports.
Lowe was being held on $310,000 bail while other victims are sought out. He died later in 2016.
SANTA SHAWN - ONE YEAR
Oshawa, Canada's ‘Santa Shawn’, a mall Santa and fetish photo aficionado, received a year in jail for possession of child pornography. Shawn Chiasson argued that the child pornography he downloaded was accidental because he downloaded so many diaper fetish images he couldn't possibly filter out the porn. Also, he believed the diaper photos didn't constitute porn, to begin with.
This case, in particular, was of interest to Canada's ABDL community, because a judge was asked to consider whether diaper pictures of those under 18 could be constituted as child pornography even if the subject of the photo wasn't nude.
"Mr. Chiasson was busted in September 2011 after attracting the attention of Toronto police monitoring a website known to be a trading venue for child pornography. The undercover cops engaged Mr. Chiasson in chats that led to him sharing his diaper-themed pictures.
The ruling Thursday by Superior Court Justice Barry MacDougall brings to an end a unique court proceeding. Although Mr. Chiasson -- a 38-year-old former daycare operator and department store Santa -- admitted to downloading and possessing the porn, he contended he has no sexual interest in children.
Rather, Mr. Chiasson, who has a life-long history of incontinence, said he obtained the illegal images along with legal diaper fetish pictures, downloaded en masse in folders swapped on a peer-to-peer website.
Defence lawyer Alan Risen advanced the argument that Mr. Chiasson was "wilfully blind" to the presence of child porn among the diaper pictures he collected.
In his ruling Justice MacDougall said that while Mr. Chiasson's intentions ameliorated the offence to a degree, he's still guilty of possessing "vile and pernicious material.
"Mr. Chiasson was operating in a very potentially dangerous area and he knew that," the judge said.
"He was aware of the extreme nature of hardcore child pornography that could be and was included in the downloads."
Police opined that some of those pictures, depicting diaper-wearing children in provocative poses, constituted child porn. Mr. Chiasson disagreed, and a significant portion of his sentencing hearing was dedicated to arguments on the issue.
Thursday Justice MacDougall ruled that while Mr. Chiasson may claim not to have found the diaper pictures in question pornographic, an objective viewer would.
Some of the images were of "very young children holding their legs apart in an unnatural position," the judge noted.
"I find an erotic image of a child can be considered pornographic," he said.
During his testimony at the sentencing hearing, an emotional Mr. Chiasson recalled a lonely and awkward childhood that was exacerbated by his incontinence. He finally found acceptance among people with issues similar to his online and began trading diaper pictures as a way to "make friends", he told the judge.
Were you one of Shawn’s friends?
If so, better check your hard drive…
By the way, U.S. law has found that going back to the 1990s. More on that in a bit...
PETERSNEAKS - 20 YEARS & LIFETIME SUPERVISION
How about Gerrett Conover - nickname: Petersneaks - who, already on a federal watch list for child pornography, posted this:
"last night I was outside in just a diaper... out front [of his house]... I soooo wish my neighbors son sees me ... he's like 14."
We've all seen shit like this.
Petersneaks was doing more than just sneaking around outside 14 year-olds' bedroom windows. He was charged with possession of child pornography as he tried to cross the Canadian border. He admitted a "close relationship" with a Boy Scout from the time the boy was aged 10 to 17 - Gerrett was a scoutmaster, you see - and admitted that he had a diaper fetish and a sneaker fetish.
“In arguing for a variance, Conover presented expert testimony from his treating psychologist, Dr. Steven Eric Samuel. Dr. Samuel testified that Conover would more appropriately be diagnosed as a paraphilic, not a pedophile, and that, due to a variety of factors, he presented a low risk of recidivism. Conover's brother and his best friend also addressed the Court, asking for leniency. Finally, Conover himself testified, stating remorse for his crimes and describing the progress he had made in therapy.”
In October 2015 Conover was sentenced to 20 years in prison, followed by lifetime supervision. His sentence has since been upheld on appeal.
STEVEN - 60 YEARS
Also, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania's Steven Mazer, 27.
In 2014, Steven was sentenced to 60 years in prison on child pornography charges.
He was accused of taking changing pics while he babysat children.
His internet use was also tracked to two unspecified websites for diaper enthusiasts.
Using the IP address from Mazer's computer, Munjone also found that the suspect visited other websites that allow image sharing for the purpose of viewing or sharing materials that exploit children. Two of those sites are for diaper enthusiasts, Munjone said.
Does anyone else wonder what sites? Or what Mr. Mazer's username was on them?
THE 1%: FIVE YEARS PROBATION
Next up: Robert Wharff, out of Kentucky, who at age 24 was spared a jury-recommended seven-year prison sentence in favor of five years probation, in part because, out of his hoard of diaper pictures, only 1% were actual child pornography.
“... of the tens of thousands of diaper-related files found on his computer devices, only a few dozen (less than 1 percent) contained child pornography (which he usually deleted, one discovered) were relatively very rare, incidental, and perhaps accidental to his download of legal yet odd diaper-related files,” attorney Dan Carman, PLLC wrote in Wharff’s defense. “To treat Robby (Wharff) the same as offenders who have had contact offense or who other wise pose a risk to others would not be just.”
The jury disagreed, but the judge agreed that Robert may have accidentally downloaded the child porn with all of the diaper porn, and allowed him a sentence of five years probation, with six pre-set conditions, the violation of any of which will result in the seven years in prison being reinstated.
In the plea agreement, Wharff’s defense states that he will attend comprehensive sex offender treatment and counseling with a SOTP-certified mental health profession ... and that he will abide by all the terms and condition of his probation, even those that exceed restrictions mandated by the sex offender registry.
One of those conditions stipulate that he will agree not to own or access any computing device.
In their final plea for probation, Carman stated Wharff has a renewed commitment to reconnect with his church where the bishop has offered support and than he would reside in apartment in either Nicholasville or Lexington that has been approved by his probation officer.
I'm guessing that one of the conditions includes not wearing diapers or practicing as an AB/DL for the next seven years. Sounds like hell to me…
CAUGHT IN A BIND: 15 YEARS
Next up: Gilbert, Arizona's Jeremy Baland. Jeremy was a practicing diaper fetishist who'd been storing a binder of diaper porn since an older man gave it to him at the age of 15. He got married at 31, and his newlywed wife found it while he was out and, as you might expect, called 911.
At last report, police were searching Baland's computer at home, where he admitted they'd probably find more child porn.
It seems that Jeremy tried the old "I'm not aroused by it, it just reminds me of when I was little" argument - one I've heard made by members of our community many times
“[Jeremy Baland] told me about some specific photos that were in the binder, and told me he placed them in the binder because it reminded him when he was little,” a report from Gilbert Police read.
The law may or may not make the distinction. And it may not care as to the state of undress of the minors in the images.
In Jeremy's case, it did not: he was sentenced to 15 years in prison. His release date is July 2026.
INTERNATIONAL CONNECTIONS
In Santa Clara County, California, 54 year old James Joseph Carothers computers were seized in 2011, following a monitored communication between him and convicted child pornographer Shawn McCormack. At least 259 images of "child erotica and pornography" - pictures of babies and toddlers in diapers - were found.
"Investigators also noted that, although Carothers only lived with another single man, they discovered numerous children's toys, girls' hair clips, as well as new and used baby diapers in the bedroom."
No word on his sentence, but he was facing up to three years in prison and lifetime registration. In January 2020, he was arrested again for possession of child pornography, after a tip from Yahoo.
News reports after the 2011 arrest noted that Carothers had plans to meet with McCormack in Las Vegas, where they could share tips on acquiring used baby diapers and molesting children. Those plans were ruined when investigators, in a case that would become famous around the world, used commercials playing on television and hotel furniture, in the background of a video of a child being raped, to arrest McCormack.
EAGLE SCOUT: FIVE YEARS
Benjamin Charles Small, of Greenville, Michigan, pleaded guilty to distributing child pornography in 2012. You may have known him as Diaper777 - but hopefully did not.
“He told the special agents that his collection would include mainly children young enough to wear diapers because he had a diaper fetish,” Woods wrote in court documents.
“The forensic examination confirmed that there were images of children either in diapers or young enough to wear diapers, performing sexual acts on adults or with the genitalia of the child being the focus of the image,” Woods wrote.
Benjamin was sentenced to five years in federal prison. He was released in March 2017.
Remember Robert Emmanuel Evans, the Eagle Scout from Kentucky? Benjamin Small was also an Eagle Scout.
Benjamin Small said he imagined himself as the child in the pictures - but it didn't matter in court. From a later news article on the case:
He was an honors student in high school, and graduated from Central Michigan University. He got a job at Consumers Energy as an information technology auditor.
After the charges were filed early this year, he was fired, while his wife left him, and filed for divorce.
“The most devastating thing to me was the loss of respect, trust and confidence in me from my family and friends,” he wrote.“The crime that I have committed completely goes against the morals and lessons that the Boy Scouts taught me, but that does not mean that I cannot reaffirm myself to those high morals and ideals.”
Small, who said he would be in counseling the rest of his life, said he has never abused a child. He acknowledged that sharing and viewing child pornography “furthered the abuse of the children involved in the photos, but I could never bring myself to do something like that to a child. When viewing the images, I imagined myself as the child, not as the adult.
“Again, this does not minimize or justify the horrible choices that I made to view this type of material.”
Diaper777 sounds familiar, right?
That name could belong to anyone in our community.
How many other Diaper777's are out there?
PROLIFIC WRITER: 6.5 YEARS
Here's a story from 2012 out of Windsor, Ontario, Canada.
Steven Slade, 44, pleaded guilty to "Internet luring" and "breach of probation" - and the article begins with this catchy zinger:
He has a penchant for diapers and sex with boys and he came to Windsor wearing one and looking for the other.
Seriously... what the fuck, Steven...
Slade, the article says, had been free for just 17 days following a child porn prison sentence when he went to the Toronto library to try to meet a 14 year-old boy to put into a diaper.
Unfortunately for Slade, the "14 year old boy" was actually a Windsor police detective, who suggested Slade meet him and - just for kicks - write "Diaper Boy + Alex" on the back of his diaper.
Slade did, and was surprised to find police detectives waiting for him as he stepped off the bus.
Soon after Mr. Slade had been released from jail, he was headed back on in…
Approximately a week after his release, Windsor was busted after halfway house staff discovered in his room numerous pornographic writings, a pair of girls panties and notes relating to the purchase of a cellphone, which he is forbidden from possessing.
Windsor confessed to police that the porn writing, including stories about diapers, was his and he also admitted going to a Value Village store that was four or five doors down from a day care, which was a breach of one of the many conditions he was bound by under his probation.
Defense lawyer Kevin Shannon noted that prosecutors were taking the unusual step of declaring him a 'dangerous offender'.
“It’s an unusual situation to be seeking a dangerous offender application given that he only has one conviction,” Shannon said. “But certainly there’s concern for the safety of the public and young people in particular.”
In December 2014 Slade was sentenced to 6.5 years in prison, as part of a 10-year supervision order, after being declared a dangerous offender.
It doesn't help that prosecutors don't fully understand infantilism. But when people like Steven Slade try to meet up and diaper 14 year old boys, it certainly hurts the rest of us.
Side note: one article mentions that Steven also has a fetish for snuffing out lives during rape scenes. Eek.
PLAYING PRETEND: 62 YEARS
Joseph Peter Garbarini, 29, out of Dallas, TX who as a kindergarten teacher was convicted of "continuous sex abuse" and "sexual performance by a child."
The crime, according to the news: pretending to put diapers on girls in class, and giving them pacifiers.
I've read about similar scenarios in some of the forums I try to avoid on various diaper sites.
In fact, I dare say that in my nearly two decades of ABDL internet, I've seen worse than this on Deeker and in other forums.
While his actions in the classroom may or may not have been consistent with the charges, it was likely what was found in his home that resulted in his charging and conviction.
Steinke also asked the jury to consider only the facts about what happened at school and not to take into account items found in Garbarini's home, which included dirty diapers, a toddler bed with shackles and a dog cage in which he was said to have slept. Animated images of children involved in sexual activities were found on his computer.
Steinke said Garbarini had been diagnosed as a masochist, but not as a pedophile.
The sentence for Mr. Garbarini?
Nothing "pretend" about spending the next six decades behind bars.
WHAT’S IN A NAME? 11 YEARS
Then there's Thomas Roussin, who was 46 when, in 2012, he pleaded guilty to "transporting and shipping child pornography" and was sentenced to more than 11 years in federal prison.
If you knew Thomas, you knew him as TXDRYPER.
His name on an online file-sharing program alone tipped off officers that he might be involved with child pornography, and they began an investigation. They got a search warrant for his home and found some questionable images.
Roussin admitted that his primary interest was viewing children in diapers - he'd been sharing images "with about 30 friends," he told investigators.
He also admitted to having photos of nude boys.
He is scheduled to be released in July of 2021.
The article says it best: "Huggies never felt so dirty."
A STEADY STREAM OF CHARGES: 18 MONTHS & PROBATION
Next up, a firefighter in California.
A former Longmont-area firefighter has pleaded guilty to forcing his 11-year-old stepdaughter to watch him urinate in an adult diaper before changing him. His stepdaughter was also allegedly forced to wear an adult diaper as punishment on two occasions.
Jesse Hodgson, 37, has at least three known victims and must now register as a sex offender after pleading guilty to felony attempted sexual assault, misdemeanor sexual exposure and misdemeanor unlawful sexual contact.
Jesse Hodgson, a former Mountain View Fire Rescue firefighter and spokesman for the department, avoided prison in 2011 in part because of his good works as a firefighter. Hodgson, then 37, had a lot of family and friends supporting him at his sentencing, where he received 18 months of work release in the local jail, followed by eight years of intensively supervised sex-offender probation.
"A little over a year ago a strange sexual fetish took over my life," Hodgson told Weld District Judge Todd Taylor during the hearing. Hodgson said he did not grasp the power the diaper fetish had over him or the consequences he would face after he pursued that fetish."
Hodgson was accused of wearing diapers while he sexually assaulted an adult; exposing his diaper to children; and putting diapers on an 11 year-old girl as a form of punishment.
"Firestone police arrested Hodgson in December after investigating reports that he sexually assaulted an intoxicated woman related to him after a Memorial Day party while he wore an adult-size diaper and that he exposed himself to a child as he pursued a sexual fetish for wearing diapers and having others change them after they were soiled. He also was accused of diapering the elementary school-age child as a form of punishment on two occasions, according to police report."
The judge noted that he doesn't sentence people based on the level of outrage in a case.
MEET YOU AT THE MALL: ACQUITTED
Jamal Harouya was charged with sexual assault, sexual interference, invitation to sexual touching, and forcible confinement in Ottawa back in July 2008. He was acquitted in 2011.
Harouya was alleged to have met up with another diaper fetishist - a boy who was 15 years of age. (Note that is just one year under Canada's age of consent.)
It was reported that the boy, who has Asperberger's syndrome, broke down on the witness stand while testifying at Harouya's trial in 2011. The boy had initially told the police Harouya forced him to purchase the diapers, and later asserted that he had purchased diapers after the sexual assault "to return to safer times" - but defense attorneys were able to show proof that the boy had a fetish for Pull-Ups diapers.
The attorney got the boy to admit that he and a friend had urinated in their diapers at least once - and the boy also admitted that parts of the encounter had been his idea. In fact, when the attorney suggested that there may have been friction between the boy and his mother over his use of the diapers, the boy left the stand, and the building.
The jury acquitted Harouya based on their belief that the teen was lying about his role in the attack. Harouya may not remain in Canada for long, though - it later was revealed that he had previously been sentenced to two years for perjury and other charges arising from his conviction for the 1996 sexual touching of a 12 year-old boy in Montreal.
It's hard to know what this one was all about...
Was the 15 year-old with Asperger's a helpless victim who was taken advantage of by a serial toucher of little boys? We don't know.
Was the man a victim of a scheming little kid who may have lied about his age? We don't know.
What we do know is that a grown man met up with a 15 year-old boy and some sort of diaper play took place in the rest room at the mall.
Would humiliation on both parts have been avoided if an "18+" barrier had taken place?
That, too, we do know - or at least should know - and the answer is "yes".
NANNY-CAM: 16 MONTHS
Also out of Canada - Winnipeg - a live-in nanny whose arrest on child pornography charges revelaed a diaper fetish.
Tony Barnes was 30 when, in 2011, he pleaded guilty to a single count of possession of child pornography and was sentenced to 16 months in jail.
His boss, the mother of the children he cared for, tried to close his laptop and inadvertently saw a photo that she believed to be suspicious. Police were called and, after getting a warrant for his room, found "an abundance of diapers" - including a soiled diaper underneath his bed.
Police searched his room after obtaining a warrant and found an ‘abundance of diapers’, including a dirty one under a pillow, Terry McComb, prosecuting, said.
They also found the pictures of children and a series of online chats in which he freely discussed sexually abusing children, often using soiled nappies.
They would later find child pornography of the diapered nature on his laptop.
In an interview with a probation officer, Barnes admitted to wearing diapers until he was four and then again as an adult.
"His sexual interest is readily apparent in wearing the diapers," McComb said.
Barnes has not been accused of abusing children.
"There is no evidence he does any of these things other than it being a fetish in his head ... other than the diapers," said defence lawyer Leonard Tailleur. "The fetish causes people to get in a state of angst."
According to prosecutors, Barnes hoped to return to childcare upon his release from prison.
They, of course, hope he would not.
TO BE A KID AGAIN… 5 YEARS
Back to the U.S. now.
In 2009, Bryan Park, 37, of Baytown, Texas, was charged with 23 counts of sexual abuse of children, after his roommate was using his computer to download music and saw images he thought may be questionable.
According to an affidavit Park told police "I have a fetish with diapers. The computer and CD are mine and I downloaded the pictures from [censored]. I have been in counseling numerous times. I am not interested in the pictures because of the children. I am interested because I want to be a kid again. I have kept myself away from kids, because the lines are too confusing and I don't want to put myself in a position to be alone with them."
In the end, photos were found that were determined to be "of children in various states of dress." A total of 23 photos of children in diapers were found, as well.
I remember the talk in our community at the time on this last one, and the general consensus seemed to be that Mr. Park was collecting diaper pictures off of the internet, and that he likely had a treasure trove of pictures that were circulating around the late 1990s and early 2000s - photos you could actually find hosted on diaper sites at that time.
Photos that we all know are wrong, but were defended by an awful lot of people back then as being "innocent" or "non-pornographic" because the teens in them were in posing in diapers.
It's likely that Bryan Park had the same pictures that hundreds of other diaper fetishists at that time were downloading, but happened to be the guy whose roommate saw them, got freaked out, and called the police.
UPDATE: I RECEIVED A MESSAGE FROM BRYAN - HE’D LIKE HIS STORY TO SERVE AS A WARNING TO OTHERS:
I am on your wall of shame, I am Bryan Park. I am not in the least angry, quite the contrary. If by reading my story and others like me on person can be diverted from making the same mistake, I'll feel like some good came from the whole fucked up mess. You might update the story to add that I got five years in state prison for 23 pics. According to state law, I could have gotten seven years PER PICTURE. The really sad thing was I had done a major purge of my collection, hence them only finding the 23 pics, but I had a CD with music burned on it and had forgotten there were pics on it. I lent it to my roommate, he saw pics of a five year old running around in a pull up and called the cops. I would like to note that he was both ABDL-aware and friendly, it was the age that freaked him out, and rightly so. The cops did not care that I had just done a purge. They did not care about anything other than that I had diaper pics of underage kids that were strangers to me.
Could you please add how sorry I am that I represented the community in such a poor light? Also, and this may not mean much coming from me, I heard about your illness. I just want to let you know that you are in my thoughts and my prayers.
DONE IN BY DROPBOX: 18 TO 55 YEARS
In 2016, the online file sharing service Dropbox noticed a possible crime. A user was accumulating a large amount of child pornography and the National Center for Missing and Exploited children was contacted. Eventually, law enforcement agencies were able to trace the account to Tyler Lowis, 23, of Sparta, Michigan.
Lowis, it turned out, had been raping two teenage boys in his trailer park.
Lowis called himself “daddy’’ and referred to his victim as “baby boy,’’ who at times was dressed in a diaper and given a pacifier during sexual assaults that played out over a two-year period, according to court records.
Lowis entered guilty pleas this week to four charges, including two counts of first-degree criminal sexual conduct, which is punishable by up to life in prison. In exchange, five other charges were dismissed.
Lowis was also found to have child pornography on his computer and tablet.
Many of the images were of young boys, including toddlers and infants, engaged in sexual acts with adults, court records show.
Lowis recorded several of the sexual assaults on a personal tablet device which was on the nightstand of his bedroom, court records show.
A search of Lowis’ tablet showed three videos of the sexual assaults and “multiple images of (the victim) wearing only a diaper and having a pacifier in his mouth,’’ according to court records.
In one of the videos, the boy is seen lying naked in bed with a blue and orange pacifier in his mouth. As Lowis rapes the boy, he calls the child “baby boy’’ several times and refers to himself as “daddy,’’ court records show. In another video, the victim is shown only in a diaper with a pacifier in his mouth.
Lowis was sentenced in 2017 to serve 18 to 55 years in prison.
WHILE WE’RE ON THE SUBJECT, LET’S AVOID TRICKERY AND DECEIT, TOO…
TRICKS ARE FOR KIDS: PRISON & PAROLE
Sometimes the victims are adults.
Take Hookset, New Hampshire's Eric Carrier, sent to jail for posing as a mentally disabled man and trying to trick females into changing his diaper. He got probation, at first, but according to police couldn't stop making the calls.
Carrier used the Internet to find the telephone number of an in-home childcare service agency, then drove to that location in New Boston and attempted to get his soiled diaper changed. According to a police affidavit, the caregiver could smell Carrier as she spoke to him in her doorway, and Carrier made reference that it would be a “long day” when she refused to change his diaper.
Carrier then “continuously denied” to his parole officer his Aug. 15 whereabouts and also denied being the person identified in the corresponding police report. He also violated a term that prohibited him from using the Internet, Marquis wrote.
Last I heard, the police were trying to gain access to his laptop, where they suspected they'd find diapered child pornography.
This case doesn't involve children, but it does involve consent - so I include it here.
CON = NO CONSENT: THREE YEARS & LIFETIME SUPERVISION
Also, there’s Mark Anthony Richardson II, 21, out of Oklahoma City, sentenced in 2011 to three years in prison, in part for grabbing the breast of an 18 year-old girl, as he pretended to be autistic and behaving like a child, all part of what police called an effort to trick women into babysitting him.
"He drank baby formula, sucked on a pacifier, and threw tantrums," the victim said.
All of the charges were misdemeanors except the felony sexual battery charge, the result of grabbing someone's breast without their consent.
“You’ve got some issues. I understand that. But, at the same time, it’s time for you to grow up,” Oklahoma County District Judge Jerry Bass said.
Here's quite the article on the story. It notes that Richardson initially attempted to get the 18 year old to babysit him, but the girl's mother wasn't comfortable with the situation and decided to do it herself. Also, he liked to rip his diaper off and run through the house naked.
Jeesh...
...and yes, I know this one doesn't involve minors, either. It still involves lack of consent, which is why I mention it here.
Mark Anthony Richardson must register as a sex offender for life.
I could go on and on; the list of diaper fetishists arrested for "blurring the lines" of 18+ is long.
There are many, many who are not mentioned here - including some from our community who many of us have seen simply disappear.
Sometimes people binge and then purge. Other times they get arrested for child pornography or underage activities, but because "diapers" aren't explicitly mentioned in the news release, we barely notice they're gone. (If we do, we probably just wonder where they disappeared to, and figure they'll eventually be back).
Like I did with Sissy Baby Ben, until last week.
Imagine one day there's a knock at your dorm room door.
The FBI swoops in and seizes your computer and your iPhone.
Their forensic experts sift through everything, looking for evidence of a crime.
They'll probably find diaper pictures upon diaper pictures.
Some are likely pictures of you.
Others might be photos you took at a diaper party.
Still others may be pics your ABDL friends have sent you.
And now you're sweating.
You didn't check ID's... are all of those people 18?
Add some additional stress if you've been saving pictures. Many in our community do… that diaper boy you're crushing on... pictures of group scenes you can only wish you were a part of... or maybe just a photo that you want to recreate later. Saved to your iPhone or PC, and now investigators are now looking through dozens, or hundreds, or thousands, of your photos, hoping to find just one they can pin on you as being child pornography.
And if you're arrested under suspicion of possession of child pornography - a suspicion that is all too common when pictures of diapers are found - this isn't an episode of Law & Order. Your attorney doesn't come swooping in to save the day.
You'll be arraigned.
Bail will be set.
If you're like most young people, you'll be left to call your parents.
Imagine that conversation.
Depending on the charges and the jurisdiction, bail could be a few thousand, or it could be one hundred thousand. In some places, where crimes against children are involved, no bail will be set.
You'll likely be offered a plea bargain.
And your parents, who may not understand paraphilic infantilism and may well associate diapers with pedophilia, like much of the rest of society, may be humiliated, and push you to take it.
Attorneys are expensive as fuck.
A criminal defense for child pornography charges costs a small fortune.
And, if your parents are even half as ignorant to the reality behind ABDL as the rest of the world, - and let's face it, 99% of us haven't done a very good job of educating our own folks - they may likely believe that they've got a defective kid on their hands.
Even after you cop a plea and are sent away for 10, or 15, or 20 years - and see the stories above if you think I'm exaggerating, with an average sentence of 19 years, 3 months - your parents still have to live in the community that you came from.
They have to face their friends and neighbors every day.
So when the prosecuting attorney offers to allow you to plea to just one image, instead of 500, even though you believe with your heart that you are 100% innocent, you - facing a humiliation of your own that can't compare to any humiliation you've ever felt - may be inclined to take it.
You may receive probation.
You may be sentenced to 62 years in prison.
Likely, though, you'll receive something in between.
But your life will be forever changed.
After a period of incarceration, where diapers likely won't be an option, you'll enter a period of restrictive probation supervision - the kind where probation officers show up at your door at any time, searching for things like children's toys and baby bottles and pacifiers.
If they find them - or, God forbid, diapers - it's back to prison you go.
On top of that, you'll be forever identifiable as a sex offender, via the registry - and, if Google isn't kind to you, you'll have link to your name forever available to the viewing public, like many of the folks above.
And forget about pornography for a moment.
Your "reaching out" to an underaged member of our community in an attempt to "counsel" them and help them may well be viewed as an adult attempting to exploit a child.
You may not see diapers as sexual. They may not see diapers as sexual. But I can guarantee with 99% certainty that the prosecuting attorney will see diapers as sexual. And you'll be left praying that you can somehow convince the jury otherwise.
Is it worth it?
My heart broke when I read the story about Robert Emmanuel Evans.
Do you expect this kid - an Eagle Scout from Kentucky - to be able to verbalize and explain the concepts behind ABDL?
"Actually, your honor, most members of our community don't feel aroused by diaper ads, but instead feel nostalgic by them."
Doubt it.
It didn't work for anyone else in the stories above. It probably wouldn't have worked for him, anyway.
The first time I read his story it made me think of someone else I know in our community - someone who was at one time woefully naive about sex, someone who had never even talked about sex with his parents for fear of revealing his sexuality.
He asked me once why all of my blog entries say "18+" and when I explained the reason to him he was legit shocked that there even was an 'age of consent', and that diaper pictures could be considered pornographic.
He had no idea of any of this. When I asked him if he'd been doing anything he shouldn't have, and his face turned white. That made me wonder how many other young people in our community don't have a full understanding of things like that.
A young Eagle Scout - a kid whose Eagle project had consisted of doing landscaping and bolting down pews at his church - was probably the last person people would expect to one day be serving time for child pornography.
Since then I've done my best to throw the "18+" terminology around as much as possible.
It's not just to protect me.
It's to protect every young person in our community who likely don't understand the seriousness of trying to battle charges of possession/transmission of child pornography in a legal system where the basic concepts behind why we are the way we are are misunderstood.
Should Robert Emmanuel Evans have known that sending pictures of himself in diapers to a teenage boy was wrong? The sensible, informed adult in me says yes. But I just finished reading a post by one of our community's younger members suggesting that our discrimination against those under 18 is wrong, since age regression isn't sexual.
I know I get a lot of hate for advocating for a separation between the ABDL community and the TBDL community.
But I also know of some shining lights in our community who have been snuffed out not because they were hard-core child sex predators, but because they were either innocent or dumb as fuck and likely didn't know any better.
SO LET’S DISPELL SOME MYTHS, SHALL WE?
Diapers aren't sexual.
You might be right - for some of us, diapers aren't sexual.
Regression is a coping mechanism.
We wet and/or mess in diapers, and suck on baby bottles, to de-stress.
But in the eyes of the law, diapers are sexual.
They are considered to be a fetish.
And a fetish is most certainly sexual.
So when you talk about diapers and ageplay with someone under the age of 18, you may already be committing a crime.
The age of consent here is 16 or 17, so 18+ doesn't matter.
In some states and Canada, a person is legally capable of consent at age 16.
In some states, it is 17.
In those states it is legally acceptable to scrump a child.
You can diaper a high school sophomore and, unless you are their teacher or coach, you will likely get away with it.
Having said that, 18+ is still the best policy.
Here's why:
First, if you've used any number of social media websites to connect with this child in any way, you could be prosecuted if the laws on the books where the social media servers are located are 18.
Such as California, where nearly every social media website is based.
It's happened.
Second, photos are still 18+.
Once your 16 year-old boy toy has sent you that snap of the diaper photo - “I woke up like this" - you are in receipt of what many jurisdictions consider a pornographic image.
The pictures aren't child pornography if I found them on Facebook.
Wrong again, son.
That picture a proud (and naive) mom posted of her baby being changed? The law in the US looks at intent. Even photos of clothed children can be considered child pornography if the authorities believe that the pictures are erotic.
Thus, pictures of babies in diapers, if viewed, stored, or shared by a diaper fetishist, can be interpreted as pornography. I suspect that one day this particular law will be challenged and successfully fought in the courts.
Maybe you'll even be the one to fight it and win!
Until someone does, why not just keep it fucking 18+?
I don't get aroused by pictures of children in diapers, I picture myself as the child.
Great. Good for you.
You'll get to explain that to the jury.
But you see how well it worked, above, for people like
Shawn Chiasson, or Benjamin Small, or Tony Barnes, or Bryan Park.
Each tried to explain their collection of diaper images as part of their need to regress.
Some of the others may have, as well.
It's still not understood enough to get an 'expert witness' in to court, I'm guessing.
And until it is, good luck using it as a defense.
Putting "18+" is discrimination.
No, it fucking isn't.
It's protection in its purest form.
It's protection of minors, who may well be targeted by those in our community who don't give a fuck about anything except getting
some ass, or getting some hot diapered images. It's protection of ourselves, as none of us want to join
those above, either in their scenarios or their cells.
And it's protection of our entire community from a justice system that simply cannot hope to understand paraphilic infantilism, and a society that still views ageplay as akin to pedophilia.
A 16 year-old ageplayer isn't going to view your "protection" any more positively than they view laws that say they can't drive after 9.
According to the law, it's not their responsibility to protect themselves - it's your responsibility to do so. You are part of a community. Take that shit seriously.
Society is changing. One day ageplay and other kinks will be accepted.
This isn't a myth, probably.
I believe that this is true.
I see a remarkable difference within our own community over the past few years.
In 2012 I held my first photo contest. I had to make a rule that nobody who entered it could display their face. That's why you see
such amazing, creative methods of facial obscurement.
The reason I had this rule? The vast majority of ABDL's entering were unwilling to show their faces
in diaper photos, and believes that the few who would do so would have an unfair advantage.
In 2013, the year I held my second contest, hiding your face was optional, and at least half of the entrants chose to let everyone see their identity. From year to year we get more bold. You might call it ABDL pride. #ABDLPrideWorldwide
But every time one of us is arrested for allowing the 18+ lines to become blurred, it sets us all back a little bit.
If you are 18 or older, welcome to the ABDL community. Please be responsible. Keep it 18+ from now on.
Protect the littler ones by always remembering that they are lurking, watching, emulating.
And, if you find yourself in a position to influence one of the members of our TBDL communities, so hoping to be included in our ABDL fun, remind them that age 18 may seem far away, now - but that our community has existed for decades, and has existed online since the late 1990s, when they were - well, zero.
It will be here when they age into it, and when they do, we can't wait to welcome them.
