RE: would you go vanilla?

RE: would you go vanilla? (Full Version)

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

Message

juliaoceania -> RE: would you go vanilla? (11/28/2007 1:56:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KatyLied quote: Why can't people just - as someone said recently - simply 'live'? I often have the same thought. There seems to a lot of competition regarding: my kink > your kink. It does get tiring. I think that it is tiring too. I have read enough about McRelationships, and the one twue way to put me off conversing with others about D/s... but then I remember you are here posting katy, so there are many voices of reason here after all. I think my sigline conveys my thoughts, labeling is for people who are too lazy or do not have the time to get to know an individual better. We all label at times, but I have no illusions that I am probably mistaken a good deal of the time when I do label others... even if it makes for a convenient shortcut here and there. I would rather have a fulfilling dynamic than one that had easy labels attached to it.. not that the two are mutually exclusive, but if I had to pick between something labeled "D/s" and being happy, i know which one I would pick. If I found myself suddenly looking again, I would pick some vanilla hotty and then corrupt him, and that is just me, and I know I am wrong, but I am ok with that[:D]

KatyLied -> RE: would you go vanilla? (11/28/2007 2:07:28 PM)
quote: but then I remember you are here posting katy, so there are many voices of reason here after all. [:)] I agree, better to have a relationship (dynamic) that fits, than to worry about what to call it or if others approve of what you call it.

goodgirl08 -> RE: would you go vanilla? (11/28/2007 2:28:26 PM)
I would have trouble for a few reasons. One is the mental aspect of domination/submission, I feel most comfortable in it. I kind of raised myself in it through adolescence so maybe I've been conditioned. However, I find that educated 'vanilla' men are less comfortable with this aspect and are pretty swayed by the idea that there's something a little wrong with a women who wants to submit. But, that is only my experience and I am also young. I also live in an environment where men are taught to be extra careful about not coming across as too aggressive. The other reason is that I need to be honest about who I am and my past with people I am in relationships with. I think it would be extremely difficult to explain a Master/slave dynamic to someone who does not operate in this way and is not familiar with the lifestyle. The thought of trying to explain that is what convinces me that there is a significant difference between a relationship with a vanilla vs. kink primary dynamic. Sure, there might be very open-minded 'vanilla' men out there who wouldn't have a problem with it after discussion. But I think many men would be insecure about it. Imagining myself in his place, I would feel very weird being with a man whose last partner was his slave, but did not want me to be his slave. On the other hand, talking about things a lot can sometimes solve any potential problems, so who knows. I don't think that it would be impossible but I don't see it as particularly desirable.

IrishMist -> RE: would you go vanilla? (11/28/2007 4:04:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark Kind of contradicts itself to me. But using your words - you are lesbien and it's just what you are - who you are. Being submissive is what and who you are - same thing - for many people. Therefore 'going back to vanilla' is a moot question. You are seperating things into neat little boxes that don't really exist except in the imagination. Having 'vanilla sex' for example - there really is no such thing as 'vanilla sex'. There are degrees of fetish, there are degrees of boring and exciting. But sex is simply sex. The more I hear people proclaim that there is such a difference, the more I believe I see people running from something, or wanting to feel like they belong to something. Why can't people just - as someone said recently - simply 'live'? the.dark. Thanks. I was trying to think of the best way to say it without resorting to my usual bitchiness [:)] You said it much clearer than I could have.

ThinkingKitten -> RE: would you go vanilla? (11/28/2007 5:33:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark Why can't people just - as someone said recently - simply 'live'? the.dark. I tried the simply living thing for over 20 years - totally ignorant of the concepts of vanilla or D or s, or any such label/lifestyle/attitude. It got me nowhere so I went looking for more. Now I know those concepts, and I don't think they're going to get me anywhere either!! If only I could be one of my cats .... [:D]

AnimusRex -> RE: would you go vanilla? (11/28/2007 6:02:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MistressSadie69 Depends on which sense you are talking about. Could I leave this site, drop my "title", and give up my "slaves"? Absolutely. I've found that most of the men I've met on here so far seem to be more trouble than they are worth. There is a ton of heartbreak waiting to be had, as there are many insincere people that abuse the fact that they are hiding behind a computer screen. However, I'm dominant by nature. I've worn the pants in every (noteworthy) relationship i've had. I'm opinionated, i'm sarcastic, and I like to have my way, and I don't like to wait to have it! lol. I'm also completely addicted to foot rubs, and so being with me means rubbing my feet- often. It's just part of the package. It's me, who I am, and I couldn't change it if I tried. Well said, Mistress Sadie. Dominance and submission are our personalities- most of us were this way long before we ever heard of BDSM and will be this way until we die. Is there really such a bright shining line that separates "US" from "THEM"? I don't think so- in My experience, even the most vanilla people enjoy sexual kink, in varying degrees.

grlneedstolearn -> RE: would you go vanilla? (11/28/2007 6:19:13 PM)
i personally could never go back to being straight vanilla. i've as well met some not great people, and i've met some awesome people including my Dom. So no, i would not go back on the other side of the fence.

MissMagnolia -> RE: would you go vanilla? (11/28/2007 6:22:43 PM)
Yes, I could in a blink of an eye. Love finds us where it finds us and if I met someone who knocked my socks off, definitely. It would be hard to accept cleaning and washing and the whole housework thing again though!![:D]

Maestro66babycak -> RE: would you go vanilla? (11/28/2007 6:31:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LuckyAlbatross It's not being kinky that causes you misery. That's like saying being black in the 1800s caused you to be miserable. Or having AIDS in the 80s. And those were a lot harder to hide than being kinky. . Do you seriously think that having AIDS wouldnt make a person miserable???? I can not believe you even thought that much less said it!!! How could a person NOT be miserable knowing they had AIDS, knowing there was nothing they could do, knowing they were going to die???!!!???!! Do you EVER think before you speak? Or are you just really that clueless???! In the 80's there was NO HOPE ! At least now there are drugs you can take that slow down the death of the person with AIDS, I hope you do not think that AIDS has been cured. Thousands of people a year contract AIDS from unprotected sex! Now we call it HIV because that is the virus and with the afore mentioned drugs full blown AIDS can sometimes be postponed or avoided. I hope you were only being a smartass and you didnt serioiusly think AIDS did not cause misery! Oh and I would go back to vanilla if that is what Master Jess wanted. But I would not , on my own go back. Even with all the misery I am going thru, I was just as miserable when I was totally vanilla, just in a different way.

ultimatesubbie -> RE: would you go vanilla? (11/28/2007 6:36:04 PM)
I was married for many years in a vanilla relationship and I was miserable. I would never go back! I know what I truly am and would never deny myself that again.

Machts -> RE: would you go vanilla? (11/28/2007 6:40:16 PM)
What is "vanilla"? A flavor?

goodgirl08 -> RE: would you go vanilla? (11/28/2007 6:41:35 PM)
I don't understand the argument that there is no significant difference between a vanilla vs. kink lifestyle, other than it is using too many labels...can anyone explain their viewpoint further?

IrishMist -> RE: would you go vanilla? (11/28/2007 7:03:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: goodgirl08 I don't understand the argument that there is no significant difference between a vanilla vs. kink lifestyle, other than it is using too many labels...can anyone explain their viewpoint further? Quite simply put I live LIFE the way I want to live it. I do NOT put a label on it other than LIFE. I do not seperate it into nice, neat little boxes....this is vanilla, this is lifestyle, this is kinky, blah blah blah It simply is....LIFE.... it does not need anything else to define it.

Machts -> RE: would you go vanilla? (11/28/2007 7:11:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: goodgirl08 I don't understand the argument that there is no significant difference between a vanilla vs. kink lifestyle, other than it is using too many labels...can anyone explain their viewpoint further? The differences are small. I'm quite sure that how we have sex does not define us in our other ways of relating to people. I am still a nice guy when I deal with customers at work-just like anyone else who works there. No one notices that I have a slightly different mindset than some. And I have no real idea of how they are in private either-any I might percive as mild could make me look like a kitten by comparison. Perhaps the single difference I see the most-might be "arrogance"?

juliaoceania -> RE: would you go vanilla? (11/28/2007 7:13:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: IrishMist quote: ORIGINAL: goodgirl08 I don't understand the argument that there is no significant difference between a vanilla vs. kink lifestyle, other than it is using too many labels...can anyone explain their viewpoint further? Quite simply put I live LIFE the way I want to live it. I do NOT put a label on it other than LIFE. I do not seperate it into nice, neat little boxes....this is vanilla, this is lifestyle, this is kinky, blah blah blah It simply is....LIFE.... it does not need anything else to define it. Amen! I often wonder about some of the people that are having trouble hooking up "lifestyle" people, why not try to find some people that are not advertising how kinky they are in your neighborhood. I bet there are a lot of kinky "vanilla" people out there that one could meet and be very compatible with them... That was why I stated that I would find a "vanilla" person if I found myself alone once more... because "vanilla" doesn't really mean anything to me.

IrishMist -> RE: would you go vanilla? (11/28/2007 7:13:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Machts quote: ORIGINAL: goodgirl08 I don't understand the argument that there is no significant difference between a vanilla vs. kink lifestyle, other than it is using too many labels...can anyone explain their viewpoint further? The differences are small. I'm quite sure that how we have sex does not define us in our other ways of relating to people. I am still a nice guy when I deal with customers at work-just like anyone else who works there. No one notices that I have a slightly different mindset than some. And I have no real idea of how they are in private either-any I might percive as mild could make me look like a kitten by comparison. Perhaps the single difference I see the most-might be "arrogance"? LMAO... Oh boy... I think that I will just leave this one alone and be nice for a change... /sigh so boring

MissMagnolia -> RE: would you go vanilla? (11/28/2007 7:25:31 PM)
Arrogance? On who's part? Subs or dominants? Some of the most arrogant arseholes I've ever come across are subs who complain they can't find a (excuse the next words folks) "real/twue" Mistress. Their arrogance is the reason why. On the other hand, many Mistresses I have known in my life are not in the least arrogant. Telling someone your opinion without dancing around a maypole for four hours isn't arrogant, it's just forthright, truthful and time efficient.

Machts -> RE: would you go vanilla? (11/28/2007 7:28:43 PM)
Arrogance in thinking we are really that different and special from other people. Especially when what they might see as a defect-we somehow view as superior.

kirby104 -> RE: would you go vanilla? (11/28/2007 7:34:10 PM)
I have concluded that I am a sadist top who sometimes likes to bottom. Due to an abusive relationship, I have anger, which makes me hestitant to top, and I fear bottoming due to the abusive relationship. I have decided to heal myself before continuing topping or bottoming. I won't be part of the cycle.

AquaticSub -> RE: would you go vanilla? (11/28/2007 7:34:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Maestro66babycak quote: ORIGINAL: LuckyAlbatross It's not being kinky that causes you misery. That's like saying being black in the 1800s caused you to be miserable. Or having AIDS in the 80s. And those were a lot harder to hide than being kinky. . Do you seriously think that having AIDS wouldnt make a person miserable???? I can not believe you even thought that much less said it!!! How could a person NOT be miserable knowing they had AIDS, knowing there was nothing they could do, knowing they were going to die???!!!???!! Do you EVER think before you speak? Or are you just really that clueless???! In the 80's there was NO HOPE ! At least now there are drugs you can take that slow down the death of the person with AIDS, I hope you do not think that AIDS has been cured. Thousands of people a year contract AIDS from unprotected sex! Now we call it HIV because that is the virus and with the afore mentioned drugs full blown AIDS can sometimes be postponed or avoided. I hope you were only being a smartass and you didnt serioiusly think AIDS did not cause misery! Oh and I would go back to vanilla if that is what Master Jess wanted. But I would not , on my own go back. Even with all the misery I am going thru, I was just as miserable when I was totally vanilla, just in a different way. Calm down. AIDs, while a very serious disease, simply isn't the death sentence it used to be. If you truly believe that having a illness like AIDs makes you miserable, I invite you to meet with women who have breast cancer and those who actually have AIDs and other terminal diseases. AIDs, cancer or any other degenerative disease doesn't force you to be miserable. It's this idea that there is no hope, there is no life, no brightness, no nothing that causes the misery. If you follow her point a little further, it wasn't being black that made people miserable. It was how people treated you if you were black. In the time period she is refering to, people were treated horribly because they had AIDs. It isn't being kinky that makes people miserable, it is how others treat kinky people.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

3.222656E-02