RE: Why are we not "vanilla"?

RE: Why are we not "vanilla"? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

onmykneesb4Him -> RE: Why are we not "vanilla"? (9/11/2007 5:07:15 AM)
For me it is deeper. my relationship evolved from vanilla to D/s (M/s, whatever). It has changed an incredible amount. Everything about it is better and we are much closer. But i have always had a desire to submit to someone. For someone who doesn't have that desire, vanilla is definitely better. For me, it's not so great.

jaxnsax -> RE: Why are we not "vanilla"? (9/11/2007 5:19:18 AM)
Greetings I am not kinky. I am not vanilla. I am me. Only one label can effectively define me; and that is woman. jaxon

TNstepsout -> RE: Why are we not "vanilla"? (9/11/2007 5:35:35 AM)
In terms of the "relationship" part I don't see much difference except that in HEALTHY D/s relationships there is an active concerted effort to create and maintain a healthy relationship. It's overly common for vanilla relationships to just sort of coast along on their own momentum rather than guiding, directing and moving them toward a goal. There is generally more self-examination and introspection going on. Obviously that doesn't mean that all D/s relationships are perfect and don't fall into the same traps as vanilla ones. I just think there is more of a blueprint and goal for the relationship. Additionally I think that the ability to be open with another person about deviant sexual interests adds an intense level of bonding and intimacy. It allows both parties to be open and to share things without fear of rejection. Even in good happy vanilla relationships sometimes there are big secrets in regard to sexual desires that form a barrier at a core level.

AquaticSub -> RE: Why are we not "vanilla"? (9/11/2007 6:18:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 quote: More openness, honesty & personal growth. Those three items are almost always emphasized as neccessary or intregal to a BDSM balance. Setting aside that every relationship is unique for the sake of simplicity, why would these qualities be intrinsic to D/s (or BDSM more broadly) and not intrinsic to "vanilla" relationships. In other words, why is WIIWD NOT "vanilla"? Yes, those qualities are intrinsic to any healthy relationship. It doesn't matter a bit what kind of relationship it is, d/s, vanilla, heterosexual, homosexual... whatever. The things that make my relationship not vanilla is that we have decided to include a power exchange in our relationship and that lovely hatbox in the corner full of toys. Those things, however, do nothing by themselves to make my relationship deeper or more honest. It is my firm belief that it is not the elements of BDSM, the dominance or the submission, that makes the relationship. It is the people involved.

EclipseAbove -> RE: Why are we not "vanilla"? (9/11/2007 8:00:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 In opening her thread on the difference between vanilla and BDSM, camille65 made the following observation. quote: From me, I can easily say that yes there is a difference, that yes a D/s relationship is indeed different. It is deeper because more of me is required. More openness, honesty & personal growth. Those three items are almost always emphasized as neccessary or intregal to a BDSM balance. Setting aside that every relationship is unique for the sake of simplicity, why would these qualities be intrinsic to D/s (or BDSM more broadly) and not intrinsic to "vanilla" relationships. In other words, why is WIIWD NOT "vanilla"? I see two different questions here. The first being about the qualities of a D/s relationship vs. a "vanilla" relationship. I don't see a necessary difference, but I think in some cases a successful D/s relationship will have more of the qualities simply because the power exchange requires it. I think you can get by easier in a "vanilla" relationship without openness, honesty and personal growth. A D/s relationship is less tolerant of lacking those qualities that make a good relationship. However, I think in most cases there really isn't any difference. The relationship is either successful and has more the "good" qualities or its not. The second question being why is WIITWD not "vanilla". That is simple. "Vanilla" is the word that we assign to everything that is not WIITWD. So, WIITWD must be not "vanilla" by definition. Now, where is the line between them? I don't think there is one - its more like a giant gray area.

FRSguy -> RE: Why are we not "vanilla"? (9/11/2007 9:30:30 AM)
I’m not really sure if the differences between the two relationship types are really all that different but I do see them as approaching life from two different angles. In a kink relationship I think the relationship is deeper because it has a tendency to strip passed the things that often offend the vanilla. I don’t think a Dom would ever have a problem asking extremely personal questions or comments or fear in any way of offending a sub where as in a vanilla relationship attitudes have backlashes that effect the relationship as a whole. I also think that with vanilla relationship everything is based on how someone feels about another person and how compatible the couple is however very little of that compatibility seems to fall on sex or personal habits until the relationship is well underway where in a kink relationship the relationship seems to start out addressing the physical and mental needs involved with both people and whether or not those needs can be met from the very beginning and the love forms afterwards. I think in a kink relationship there is a greater one to one knowledge between the two people and greater tendency for vanilla relationships to just float out there where the two people have totally separate lives and seem to come together on occasion. A lot of vanilla relationships I have seen are so far removed from one another that the partnership is more of a domestic business than a relationship. I also think that kinky people use sex to express a greater variety of emotions rather than just love and affection. I say this because I have notices that in the studies that they do there is always this 20% male factor. Roughly 20% of males are responsible for all the woman who have taken it in the ass. Roughly 20% of the males have had more than nine woman in there lifetime. The percentages change over the years but roughly 20% of the population appears to be kink orientated in the bedroom regardless of the types of relationships they have while only some 2-3% or so seem to identify as being something other than average. I have always translated this as being that some 20% or more of the population have a tendency to express non traditional emotions with sexuality and as a result twist there sexuality into non traditional forms in order to cater to this.

MadRabbit -> RE: Why are we not "vanilla"? (9/11/2007 10:01:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 In other words, why is WIIWD NOT "vanilla"? Its the "tried and true" tactic of bringing together a group of people together as a community. Its been used endlessly in history. You get the people to self identity as outcasts, create an entity that encompasses everyone else who is not in this group, and then assign generalizations to it so the group fears it as an enemy as well as prides itself because they are so much better than the entity. "We are so much more enlightend, superior, blah, blah than vanilla people." "Vanilla people wont understand. They will seek to destroy your jobs and your life if they find out you like to tie up your girlfriend with shoestrings" You can see it in action with a slightly different techinque regarding the "United States" with "terrorists". We dont identity as outcasts, but we have created an evil entity known as the "terrorists" to help foster allegiance and patriotism in the United States. "We have it so much better than the terrorists, because we are so free and not oppressed" "We have to ban together to stop these terrorists. They are in the bushes and going to attack! They are going to destroy our freedom!" Or view religion... "We the Christians are so enlightened and superior to all the Non Christians. The Non Christians wont understand the power of the faith and the True revelation that we have discovered. We must remain close and protect ourselves from a culture that is constantly rejecting and attacking our values." The sect of Christians views themselves as outcasts in a world thats turning to shit, fosters a sense of price in what they are, and keeps them together by imposing a fear of consequences of what will happen if they stray too far from the True path. Blah...blah...so annoying...but yet so effective into turning people into sheep. The best way to bring a group of people together is to give them an enemy that they can fear, but pride themselves on being better then. I've listened to this kind of shit regarding the "vanilla world" time and time again at munches and events. It makes me want to reach for a trash bucket and puke. BDSM is an activity to me...an activity no different than other activities like knitting, sports, watching movies, or surfing. Its also a relationship, a relationship that contains trust, integrity, and deepness based on the efforts of two individuals, not because of the relationship itself. Without the two people, there would be no relationship. Just because I like apples does not make me anymore enlightened, superior or better than the enlightened, superior, and better people who like bannanas.

xoxi -> RE: Why are we not "vanilla"? (9/11/2007 10:44:52 AM)
quote: Blah...blah...so annoying...but yet so effective into turning people into sheep. Not just sheep. Enlightened sheep with whips, chains, and 20% more honesty and depth than the original variety!!! 20% more honesty and depth!!!! Seriously how can you beat that????

onmykneesb4Him -> RE: Why are we not "vanilla"? (9/11/2007 10:54:35 AM)
In the admittedly short time that i've been here, i've read a lot of posts criticizing people for thinking that "we" as people who practice BDSM in one form or another are better than those people that have been labeled vanilla. But i don't see it. Maybe i haven't been here long enough, but i haven't seen anyone proclaiming to be any better than another group of people. i only see people saying we need to stop. Confusing.........

phoenixsub999 -> RE: Why are we not "vanilla"? (9/11/2007 10:56:10 AM)
If you asked me a year ago, I would have said there is vanilla (just vaginal fucking) and kinky (oral, anal) and then BDSM (dominance/submission, sometimes with pain and sometimes without). Now, I think that there are so many combinations of what people like/don't like that putting a label on it seems to confuse the issue more than not. Putting a label on things can preclude a discussion to clarify likes/dislikes - it's that preconceived notion thing. How many times has someone said - I met so-and-so and they said they were vanilla, but when we actually got together, it turned out they were submissive or like a little slapping, etc. so we had more in common with our tastes than we first thought? Imagine if you decided not to meet them because they said they were 'vanilla'?

AFlyInYourWeb -> RE: Why are we not "vanilla"? (9/11/2007 11:11:15 AM)
The difference for me lies in the increased depth of emotional bonding, especially in LTRs. I think it starts with sharing each other's desires and hopes that cannot be easily shared with a vanilla partner. I believe that mutual acceptance of each other's secret selves creates an added level of bonding. As the relationship progresses, the range and intensity of feelings that the play evokes is much wider and stronger than the emotion in any vanilla relationship I have experienced.

AquaticSub -> RE: Why are we not "vanilla"? (9/11/2007 11:14:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xoxi quote: Blah...blah...so annoying...but yet so effective into turning people into sheep. Not just sheep. Enlightened sheep with whips, chains, and 20% more honesty and depth than the original variety!!! 20% more honesty and depth!!!! Seriously how can you beat that???? You know... I'm sitting here at my computer feeling all snotty and sickly... and now I have pictures of bondage sheep prancing around through my head. I don't know if I should thank you or not... [:D]

MadRabbit -> RE: Why are we not "vanilla"? (9/11/2007 11:36:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AFlyInYourWeb I think it starts with sharing each other's desires and hopes that cannot be easily shared with a vanilla partner. I would be interested in reading your explanation as to why desire and hopes cannot be shared as easily with a vanilla partner quote: ORIGINAL: AFlyInYourWeb As the relationship progresses, the range and intensity of feelings that the play evokes is much wider and stronger than the emotion in any vanilla relationship I have experienced I am currently reading a book on Tantric religion and sexual practices. They use these same descriptors to describe their sex life as well.

xoxi -> RE: Why are we not "vanilla"? (9/11/2007 11:37:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AquaticSub quote: ORIGINAL: xoxi quote: Blah...blah...so annoying...but yet so effective into turning people into sheep. Not just sheep. Enlightened sheep with whips, chains, and 20% more honesty and depth than the original variety!!! 20% more honesty and depth!!!! Seriously how can you beat that???? You know... I'm sitting here at my computer feeling all snotty and sickly... and now I have pictures of bondage sheep prancing around through my head. I don't know if I should thank you or not... [:D] Awww...just grab one of the bondage sheep who likes to be humiliated. Reusable Kleenex!

MadRabbit -> RE: Why are we not "vanilla"? (9/11/2007 11:40:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: onmykneesb4Him In the admittedly short time that i've been here, i've read a lot of posts criticizing people for thinking that "we" as people who practice BDSM in one form or another are better than those people that have been labeled vanilla. But i don't see it. Maybe i haven't been here long enough, but i haven't seen anyone proclaiming to be any better than another group of people. i only see people saying we need to stop. Confusing......... In all honesty, as far as online, I only notice it when it comes to certain discussions. You really gotta go out to the public scene to get a full taste of the "Rawr, Raw, Ree! Kick the vanilla people in the knee!" attitude.

AquaticSub -> RE: Why are we not "vanilla"? (9/11/2007 11:46:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xoxi Awww...just grab one of the bondage sheep who likes to be humiliated. Reusable Kleenex! I think I'm even more disturbed now...

MadRabbit -> RE: Why are we not "vanilla"? (9/11/2007 11:48:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xoxi quote: Blah...blah...so annoying...but yet so effective into turning people into sheep. Not just sheep. Enlightened sheep with whips, chains, and 20% more honesty and depth than the original variety!!! 20% more honesty and depth!!!! Seriously how can you beat that???? Maybe its just me. I think I just missed out on the instant transcendence that is supposed to happen when I woke up one day and decided to be BDSM.

CreativeDominant -> RE: Why are we not "vanilla"? (9/11/2007 12:43:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 In opening her thread on the difference between vanilla and BDSM, camille65 made the following observation. quote: From me, I can easily say that yes there is a difference, that yes a D/s relationship is indeed different. It is deeper because more of me is required. More openness, honesty & personal growth. Those three items are almost always emphasized as neccessary or intregal to a BDSM balance. Setting aside that every relationship is unique for the sake of simplicity, why would these qualities be intrinsic to D/s (or BDSM more broadly) and not intrinsic to "vanilla" relationships. In other words, why is WIIWD NOT "vanilla"? For me, there are several things. First, there is the power exchange. I will not enter into any long-term relationship anymore without that being present. If that means I spend the rest of my life alone, so be it...I would rather be alone than to ever again try a relationship where "each of us has the same power to make decisions, to tell the other what to do, etc., etc." That way leads to endless discussions because no one has the "right" to say "finis...I will make a decision", coasting with, in many cases, one partner going along with what they are told it should be while chafing all the while at the lack of "their" view not being the one which is followed, hierarchy and structure. Which leads to my second point... Structure. So many vanilla relationships seem to coast along with vague goals that are situational...raise the kids, fix the car, where are we going on the next vacation, etc.. There is no defined set up of "where do we want to take this dynamic? how do we get there? etc.?" along with the corresponding answers. To do this, you need partners who are willing to open themselves up to this discussion and agree to there being a leader and a follower. That speaks once again to my first point and to my third. Honesty, openness, introspection. I thought TNstepsout put it nicely in her post...oftentimes in a vanilla relationship, you do not find partners willing to express their doubts and fears honestly for fear of ridicule. You don't see the willingness to discuss sexual fantasies for fear of being thought of as "sick" or as veering too far from what "nice" people talk about or "being obsessed" with sex or as "shallow". You do not see partners willing to look inside themselves and find the person their partner is trying to bring out or would like to see brought out. Too many have this attitude of "I am perfect the way I am". None of the above is meant to claim that all D/s relationships are perfect or that all "vanilla" relationships are screwed. And when it comes down to it, we are all going to see it differently but for ME...and ME only...I have done enough of the vanilla relationships and have seen enough of them where what I...and others...have noted is present that I know that I don't want to go there again. Notice that none of the above involved kink.

missturbation -> RE: Why are we not "vanilla"? (9/11/2007 12:47:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jaxnsax Greetings I am not kinky. I am not vanilla. I am me. jaxon I'm going to ditto this statement. We are what we are, why the need to define it any more than that?

AquaticSub -> RE: Why are we not "vanilla"? (9/11/2007 12:47:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit Maybe its just me. I think I just missed out on the instant transcendence that is supposed to happen when I woke up one day and decided to be BDSM. It's in the fine print on your first flogger. Transcendal experience within 90 days or your money back!

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875