Snipped for focus:
It seems to me that, depending on the speed of the fluid, that that could be further qualified to:" the exact right Man doing the exact right thing in the exact right moment." Which seems daunting, and is prolly impossible, if we are approaching interaction from a standpoint of static knowledge, or our memorized idea of who/what that person is. Seeing interaction as a dance helps me. It may be choreographed, the steps memorized, but there is still a lead and a follower, and the motion of the dance is individual, personalized, by the dancers.
But when I said "right man" it was in quotation marks as I'm aware of all the qualifiers that the phrase carries. I was more interested in how the other poster distinguishes "littles" from "baby girls" and "age regression" versus "role playing". There's a point where all of this seems like splitting hairs for me and I'm interested in how others perceive what can frequently seem to be minutiae to me when all the words are woven and packaged away. Thanks, as always, for your response since you're always very eloquent and thought provoking. I'm left still not understanding how some people see the difference between littles and baby girls, and age regression versus role playing that was introduced previously.
i felt like i went on a hair splitting ramble with that one and left out something which may or may not have meaning for you or others.
i have never thought of myself as a "little, baby, or age regressed." Then i spent time with a Man. There were no labels or identifiers used between us, i've written about the experience in other posts, but the result was, He regressed me. i wasn't looking for it, we hadn't discussed it, i suspect He was just being Himself, but i do not honestly know if He was purposefully trying to regress me.
It was not till after that i realized what had happened and put words to it. But while we were together He kept affirming me and identifying me as a "good boy, " telling me how "proud He was of me, etc.." At one point, i was there, i was a good boy and feeling proud of myself, even blushing when He praised me as such.
i'm pretty analytical, so i have looked at the experience a lot since then. i can only speak for myself, but i don't identify as a little, baby or "boy," but i think there is a part of me that can be evoked and surfaced that is a "boy."
For me, It was real, i was not playing a role.
i speculate that, for me, it's because there were parts of me that were closeted during that age and maybe in some sexual/relationship ways i didn't develop (thinking Erik Erikson psychological development system) because as a kinky gay boy there was no cultural context for me to grow up in. So a part of me, not all of me is still there.
i wonder if evoked is more accurate than regressed though? i think part of the conflict we feel accepting these labels some times is we try to make them all or nothing, when it may just be a part of us?