Amaros
Posts: 1363
Joined: 7/25/2005
Status: offline
|
I disagree, "Vanilla" represents a division between what is often called the dominant culture and subcultural deviations with which the dominant culture is often at odds.
The dominant culture is always "vanilla", which one could define as "statistically average" possibly, the fat middle of the curve - but it really more of a cultural thing than a statistical thing, it's the orthodoxy, that which is considered "unquestioned", and above criticism, in social terms; the safe middle of the pack.
In Western culture, this means traditional, Judeo-Christian, no frills monogamy, roughly speaking: if there is kinky sex, it's neither recognized or alluded to, it is not validated - and it's always there, in spades, but if it isn't syncretized and whitewashed: i.e., Judeo-Christian monogamy could be described in kink terms as male supremacy, with a significant aspects of obedience training, orgasm denial (for women), breeding fetishes, psychological dominance, etc., etc., then it is denounced, and this gives you non-consensual objectification/humiliation of any competing social dynamic that appears to threaten the hegemony: perverts, faggots, feminazis, liberals, ecoterrorists, etc.
"Vanilla" among kinksters, is a cynical dismissal, and equates to "boring". "Pervert", coming from a Vanilla, by stark contrast, is an accusation, a charge that is practically interchangeable with criminal, and in fact, has historically been largely indistinguishable from "criminal", depending on place and time - i.e., it justifies the use of force, both legal and extralegal: when homosexuals are beaten, or prostitutes murdered, there is little concern from the orthodoxy, since by defying and refusing to conform to it's strictures, they have removed themselves from under the wing of it's social protection, and it is not uncommon to find this crossing over from the informal, to formal, institutional repression, at which point you can start talking about sado-masochism in earnest.
So, Vanilla encompasses this social dynamic as well, and this is a much larger distinction than merely how kinky you are, in fact, kink becomes largely irrelevant - it describes the degree of conformity to the dominant social mores of a culture, whatever it's statistical significance: it is dominant to the extent it is able to employ both social/peer pressure to siolate and marginalize deviations, and it's ability and propensity to apply force majeure to punish those "deviants" - even if there is little difference between them on the individual, behavioral level - it's all about the symbolic signicance of conforming to particular social mores, it's about status quo.
A long discussion of the complexities of interlocking r/K strategies would ensue here at this point, but if there is a less antagonistic way of describing it than "Vanilla, I'd like to hear it.
Technically, under the constitutional rule of law, there is no grounds for the formal establishment of any particular set of social rules or mores other than that which is proscribed by law, and elucidated in the Bill of Rights - informally, there are continual attempts to establish social hegemony through statues and social pressures alike, that itself reflects the constant evolutionary tension and balance between conformity and diversity.
This might seem a little heavy, but I have to go by the historical averages, rather than whatever state of equalibrium currently applies.
< Message edited by Amaros -- 2/20/2009 11:24:49 AM >
|
RE: Define Vanilla, Go On ...... - 
Profile
cream, etc. 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread