This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 |
Why did WLU revert my edit?!?! Dark windows of the soul ( talk) 03:58, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
A couple observations: 1) The IP poster(s) with IPs from the same connection claims to be different people. 2) Someone (Spl1) deleted comments critical of him/her self. Who would think a harmless fetish would cause so much consternation? (I'm neglecting the tildes because I think it's a stupid policy to ask people to do something that's easily done on the software level) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.228.6.118 ( talk • contribs) 21:25, August 11, 2012
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Paraphilic infantilism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:38, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Paraphilic infantilism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:03, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
The most obvious explanation is missing: sexual feelings developed earlier than in puberty, as a child. The time of the first sexual arousal is always remembered vividly, and by imagining to be at that age again, it can be relived. This also means that diaper fetishism must be something completely different, since no one remembers being a baby; so diaper fetishism should be a seperate article. -- 91.34.137.70 ( talk) 10:37, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
I believe that the phrase towards the beginning of the article is too quick to jump to the conclusion that Paraphillic infantalism is a sexual fetish. While it may be for some, this is most certainly not always the case.
My opinion is that instead of reading:
Paraphilic infantilism, also known as autonepiophilia,[1] psychosexual infantilism,[2] and adult baby syndrome[3] is a sexual fetish that involves...
I should be more accurately be phrased as
Paraphilic infantilism, also known as autonepiophilia,[1] psychosexual infantilism,[2] and adult baby syndrome[3] is a sexual fetish and/or <descriptor> that involves...
For the descriptor I think it would behoove the article for it to be something along the lines of: interest lifestyle fantasy or something else
I would also argue that the sentence be rephrased entirely to draw a distinction between Infantilism as a fetish, and as an interest and fantasy, something for stress relief and fun. This is not currently implied, thus creating the impression that all Infantalists are sexual deviants, which just plays in to a misconception. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6000:101E:C02D:E924:52C7:ABD:3B6C ( talk) 13:21, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Adult baby syndrome is not a sexual fetish, Diaper lovers are the sexual side of this. If this was sexual it wouldn’t develop until later in life, It is considered a Life style condition and I have been into it since I was very young before I even know what sex was. Sid4k4 ( talk) 18:56, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 |
Why did WLU revert my edit?!?! Dark windows of the soul ( talk) 03:58, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
A couple observations: 1) The IP poster(s) with IPs from the same connection claims to be different people. 2) Someone (Spl1) deleted comments critical of him/her self. Who would think a harmless fetish would cause so much consternation? (I'm neglecting the tildes because I think it's a stupid policy to ask people to do something that's easily done on the software level) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.228.6.118 ( talk • contribs) 21:25, August 11, 2012
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Paraphilic infantilism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:38, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Paraphilic infantilism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:03, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
The most obvious explanation is missing: sexual feelings developed earlier than in puberty, as a child. The time of the first sexual arousal is always remembered vividly, and by imagining to be at that age again, it can be relived. This also means that diaper fetishism must be something completely different, since no one remembers being a baby; so diaper fetishism should be a seperate article. -- 91.34.137.70 ( talk) 10:37, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
I believe that the phrase towards the beginning of the article is too quick to jump to the conclusion that Paraphillic infantalism is a sexual fetish. While it may be for some, this is most certainly not always the case.
My opinion is that instead of reading:
Paraphilic infantilism, also known as autonepiophilia,[1] psychosexual infantilism,[2] and adult baby syndrome[3] is a sexual fetish that involves...
I should be more accurately be phrased as
Paraphilic infantilism, also known as autonepiophilia,[1] psychosexual infantilism,[2] and adult baby syndrome[3] is a sexual fetish and/or <descriptor> that involves...
For the descriptor I think it would behoove the article for it to be something along the lines of: interest lifestyle fantasy or something else
I would also argue that the sentence be rephrased entirely to draw a distinction between Infantilism as a fetish, and as an interest and fantasy, something for stress relief and fun. This is not currently implied, thus creating the impression that all Infantalists are sexual deviants, which just plays in to a misconception. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6000:101E:C02D:E924:52C7:ABD:3B6C ( talk) 13:21, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Adult baby syndrome is not a sexual fetish, Diaper lovers are the sexual side of this. If this was sexual it wouldn’t develop until later in life, It is considered a Life style condition and I have been into it since I was very young before I even know what sex was. Sid4k4 ( talk) 18:56, 26 April 2021 (UTC)