Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: When is vanilla not vanilla?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: When is vanilla not vanilla? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: When is vanilla not vanilla? - 5/15/2009 3:57:12 PM   
leadership527


Posts: 5026
Joined: 6/2/2008
Status: offline 		Like all the other labels, there is no canonical source to reference. But I identify as vanilla primarily because I don't do BD or SM and my relationships are not sex based. Granted, that's pretty arbitrary. Maybe a better way to put it is that I self-identify as vanilla because I find little in common with people who identify as kinky.

_____________________________

~Jeff

I didn't so much "enslave" Carol as I did "enlove" her. - Me
I want a joyous, loving, respectful relationship where the male is in charge and deserves to be. - DavanKael

(in reply to stella41b)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: When is vanilla not vanilla? - 5/15/2009 11:31:18 PM   
porcelaine


Posts: 5020
Joined: 7/24/2006
Status: offline 		i truthfully believe this is most despicable word i see used in this community. it is rarely used in a positive manner and relationships are just that. just because i implement kink into mine doesn't make my situation better, different, or anything else. because no one is doing kink every minute of the day. people still have to do mundane tasks and exist in a world that doesn't always involve our fetishes.

i seek balance in my relationships. and truthfully there could never be an exchange until we have reached a certain point as man and woman first. after all, how on earth can i yield if i have no concept of who the person is lurking underneath the role/label/what have you? sometimes the further you get into a situation the more you realize that we're all seeking similar things, just merely going about it differently.

people will mind fuck the hell out of the simplest things if you let them. sometimes the answers we seek are the ones we're unwilling to see.

porcelaine

_____________________________

His will; my fate.

(in reply to stella41b)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: When is vanilla not vanilla? - 5/16/2009 12:04:42 AM   
Magusuri


Posts: 1
Joined: 5/5/2009
Status: offline 		I'm gonna go out on a limb and say, "When it's chocolate".

(in reply to porcelaine)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: When is vanilla not vanilla? - 5/16/2009 3:53:56 AM   
Whiplashsmile4


Posts: 2305
Joined: 12/2/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: porcelaine

i truthfully believe this is most despicable word i see used in this community. it is rarely used in a positive manner and relationships are just that. just because i implement kink into mine doesn't make my situation better, different, or anything else. because no one is doing kink every minute of the day. people still have to do mundane tasks and exist in a world that doesn't always involve our fetishes.

i seek balance in my relationships. and truthfully there could never be an exchange until we have reached a certain point as man and woman first. after all, how on earth can i yield if i have no concept of who the person is lurking underneath the role/label/what have you? sometimes the further you get into a situation the more you realize that we're all seeking similar things, just merely going about it differently.

people will mind fuck the hell out of the simplest things if you let them. sometimes the answers we seek are the ones we're unwilling to see.

porcelaine


For some of us it's just not about kink, it's about D/s. For some of us the orientations are more tightly coupled with our personalities and desires. D/s effects our vanilla world very much and is part of the mudane tasks of day to day life. BDSM is not about kink and kink alone.

I'm pretty assertive in terms of what I think, feel and want done at times that it's not funny. Now, if I'm not with a woman who can deal with it, there's trouble. I tend to deal better with women who are self indentified submissives or are actually submissive in their core. Or women who are Dominant and understand the working and mindset of other Dominant personalities. In short anybody who is able to understand and deal with things.

Okay for instance going out to the movies. Having a submissive slip her hands into my pants (the classic fooling around in the movie theater activitity). I can just simply suggest it or express it and it's done. Now with a kinky Dominant female.. her mind might get to thinking about kicking things up a notch or two. She'll be putting her 2 cents worth in.

Trying to get a Vanilla girl to do this? God, you've a perverted disqusting soul that has no social manners, rude deviatant kinky burn in hell bastard for even having thoughts of doing this. Jaw is dropping in complete disbelief that somebody so nice could be such a filthly disquesting pig. Now, Yeah... she's 100% vanilla through and through.

I ain't got a problem calling somebody vanilla.

Okay, somebody asking me for permission to spend money on something or having an allowence. I like this. It keeps the finances in order and check. Somebody out spending money left and right without checking with me. I have an issue with.

Somebody is not keeping up with their weight around the house, damn it, I will be riding their ass. Personally, some people need to have some discpline.

Again, back to an earlier post. How many grown ADULTS to you know that will consent to punishment being part of their relationship dynamic? Bad girl, you need an ass spanking.

Lord, now some people have this debate about spanking ass. That yeah spanking can be a turn on for many. However you can make a spanking a not enjoyable experience for those that even love being spanked. It's all in the way you spank.

None the less, how many grown adults are willing to consent to punishment by their partners? the D in BDSM represents two things you know.

BDSM is and can be more than just KINK for some of us. Sure, I'm kinky... but it don't just stop there.

If I felt there was little difference between BDSM and Vanilla, I would have a membership on eHarmony and other sites geared towards more mainstream dating or mainstream relationship types. This ain't the case.

Sure I have Vanilla activities I enjoy, I would hope everybody does.

(in reply to porcelaine)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: When is vanilla not vanilla? - 5/16/2009 4:56:21 AM   
HatesParisHilton


Posts: 3513
Joined: 12/27/2006
Status: offline 		"So when does vanilla cease to be vanilla?"

When Hot Topic and Maddona can paint it black and sell it back to emos as "naughty".


 "Where are the boundaries?"

Next to the "grounds for divorce" paperwork left by your bedside table by the person you either didn't spank (for a dom) or failed to let spank you (inverse)

 "The parameters?"

Listed on the label of the mail-order corset next to the e-bay bill of sale.

When does a vanilla relationship become something else?
 
When one or both of the partners stops lying about being vanilla when they were not vanilla whn they began the relationship.  Case closed.  Next question?

_____________________________

I am (now) "Hiltie", hear me ROARRRRR! And have a cuffy cake, they're nice.

(in reply to kittinSol)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: When is vanilla not vanilla? - 5/16/2009 12:36:56 PM   
porcelaine


Posts: 5020
Joined: 7/24/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Whiplashsmile4

Okay for instance going out to the movies. Having a submissive slip her hands into my pants (the classic fooling around in the movie theater activitity). I can just simply suggest it or express it and it's done. Now with a kinky Dominant female.. her mind might get to thinking about kicking things up a notch or two. She'll be putting her 2 cents worth in.

Trying to get a Vanilla girl to do this? God, you've a perverted disqusting soul that has no social manners, rude deviatant kinky burn in hell bastard for even having thoughts of doing this. Jaw is dropping in complete disbelief that somebody so nice could be such a filthly disquesting pig. Now, Yeah... she's 100% vanilla through and through.


Or maybe she just doesn't feel like slipping her hands down your pants either. But then again, it is easier to make broad generalizations than to simply say the girl didn't want to do it. I'm sure there are persons in and outside the kink that may not find that appealing. So if a submissive rejects your request what does that make her?

porcelaine


_____________________________

His will; my fate.

(in reply to Whiplashsmile4)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: When is vanilla not vanilla? - 5/17/2009 3:43:18 AM   
Whiplashsmile4


Posts: 2305
Joined: 12/2/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: porcelaine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Whiplashsmile4

Okay for instance going out to the movies. Having a submissive slip her hands into my pants (the classic fooling around in the movie theater activitity). I can just simply suggest it or express it and it's done. Now with a kinky Dominant female.. her mind might get to thinking about kicking things up a notch or two. She'll be putting her 2 cents worth in.

Trying to get a Vanilla girl to do this? God, you've a perverted disqusting soul that has no social manners, rude deviatant kinky burn in hell bastard for even having thoughts of doing this. Jaw is dropping in complete disbelief that somebody so nice could be such a filthly disquesting pig. Now, Yeah... she's 100% vanilla through and through.


Or maybe she just doesn't feel like slipping her hands down your pants either. But then again, it is easier to make broad generalizations than to simply say the girl didn't want to do it. I'm sure there are persons in and outside the kink that may not find that appealing. So if a submissive rejects your request what does that make her?

porcelaine



All depends, I was being somewhat serious with a radiculas example. But none the less. If she points out that there's family with little kids near.. or her fingers are covered in salty pop corn butter (which is not condusive). okay, no problem. Otherwise, it's nice to be around somebody who is willing to fool around. So yeah, if i ask for a little hand action play during a movie in a theater. Good lord, there really are girls/women who would do it and not get all uptight and bent out of shape about it. Sort of make D/s sound like an aweful and terrible forced thing. But yeah, I wrote what I wrote as an Example.

It can be about ass spanking in private. The movie theather bit borders on the thrill of perhaps getting caught or doing something naughty in public. That's a form of kink in itself.

I used an Example in an attempt to convey a concept. In terms of anything D/s, the submissive either will or won't do it. Some people are into S&M and others are not. If you find somebody who is not compatiable with you, simply move along and date or find somebody else if it's a big deal.

To answer your question "So if a submissive rejects your request what does that make her?" Disobedient, unless she gives good reason for it otherwise.

(in reply to porcelaine)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: When is vanilla not vanilla? - 5/17/2009 3:53:57 AM   
lally2


Posts: 2621
Joined: 4/16/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: porcelaine
Or maybe she just doesn't feel like slipping her hands down your pants either. But then again, it is easier to make broad generalizations than to simply say the girl didn't want to do it. I'm sure there are persons in and outside the kink that may not find that appealing. So if a submissive rejects your request what does that make her?

porcelaine



i think that whiplash wouldnt be with someone in the first place, if she wasnt the type to have a bit of risky fun in a public place and he would almost certainly find himself a submissive who was geared to pleasing him rather more than pleasing herself.

its actually a good example of where the cut off starts i think.  someone mainstream who felt uncomfortable with this would say no and that would be that.  someone submissive who felt uncomfortable would say yes.

the reasons for the sub to say yes are complicated, but, speaking for myself, if i said no to Sir in that situation it would create a shift in our dynamic that neither of us would be happy or comfortable with.  i find saying no to Him extremely difficult, doesnt mean i dont struggle with stuff and i might struggle with this example but i would do it if the coast was clear because not to do it would be far more uncomfortable for me - it would feel like id taken advantage of a situation He couldnt deal with right away and basicallly taken control of the decision making, something im not allowed to do.

trouble is, you cant make generalised comments on a subject matter that is so polarised but also meets somewhere inbetween.  too many varieties on a theme.  im still sticking with consent as the cut off.

< Message edited by lally2 -- 5/17/2009 4:08:29 AM >

(in reply to porcelaine)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: When is vanilla not vanilla? - 5/17/2009 4:22:07 AM   
Whiplashsmile4


Posts: 2305
Joined: 12/2/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

quote:

ORIGINAL: porcelaine
Or maybe she just doesn't feel like slipping her hands down your pants either. But then again, it is easier to make broad generalizations than to simply say the girl didn't want to do it. I'm sure there are persons in and outside the kink that may not find that appealing. So if a submissive rejects your request what does that make her?

porcelaine



i think that whiplash wouldnt be with someone in the first place, if she wasnt the type to have a bit of risky fun in a public place and he would almost certainly find himself a submissive who was geared to pleasing him rather more than pleasing herself.

its actually a good example of where the cut off starts i think.  someone mainstream who felt uncomfortable with this would say no and that would be that.  someone submissive who felt uncomfortable would say yes.

the reasons for the sub to say yes are complicated, but, speaking for myself, if i said no to Sir in that situation it would create a shift in our dynamic that neither of us would be happy or comfortable with.  i find saying no to Him extremely difficult, doesnt mean i dont struggle with stuff and i might struggle with this example but i would do it if the coast was clear because not to do it would be far more uncomfortable for me - it would feel like id taken advantage of a situation He couldnt deal with right away and basicallly taken control of the decision making, something im not allowed to do.

trouble is, you cant make generalised comments on a subject matter that is so polarised but also meets somewhere inbetween.  too many varieties on a theme.  im still sticking with consent as the cut off.


I almost hate to say this, but some people are more inclined towards TPE while others are not. Those that are more TPE inclined have fewer issues with doing things that their Dom/Master/Sir/Daddy/Mistress/Domme/Lord/OverLord/Owner/Queen (additional label nausiam) wants, needs, asks, requests, orders, commands or otherwise makes known to said submissive/slave/girl/little girl/little boy/boi/fuckmeat/slut/doormat/maid/butler...


(in reply to lally2)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: When is vanilla not vanilla? - 5/17/2009 4:36:41 AM   
lally2


Posts: 2621
Joined: 4/16/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Whiplashsmile4


quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

quote:

ORIGINAL: porcelaine
Or maybe she just doesn't feel like slipping her hands down your pants either. But then again, it is easier to make broad generalizations than to simply say the girl didn't want to do it. I'm sure there are persons in and outside the kink that may not find that appealing. So if a submissive rejects your request what does that make her?

porcelaine



i think that whiplash wouldnt be with someone in the first place, if she wasnt the type to have a bit of risky fun in a public place and he would almost certainly find himself a submissive who was geared to pleasing him rather more than pleasing herself.

its actually a good example of where the cut off starts i think.  someone mainstream who felt uncomfortable with this would say no and that would be that.  someone submissive who felt uncomfortable would say yes.

the reasons for the sub to say yes are complicated, but, speaking for myself, if i said no to Sir in that situation it would create a shift in our dynamic that neither of us would be happy or comfortable with.  i find saying no to Him extremely difficult, doesnt mean i dont struggle with stuff and i might struggle with this example but i would do it if the coast was clear because not to do it would be far more uncomfortable for me - it would feel like id taken advantage of a situation He couldnt deal with right away and basicallly taken control of the decision making, something im not allowed to do.

trouble is, you cant make generalised comments on a subject matter that is so polarised but also meets somewhere inbetween.  too many varieties on a theme.  im still sticking with consent as the cut off.


I almost hate to say this, but some people are more inclined towards TPE while others are not. Those that are more TPE inclined have fewer issues with doing things that their Dom/Master/Sir/Daddy/Mistress/Domme/Lord/OverLord/Owner/Queen (additional label nausiam) wants, needs, asks, requests, orders, commands or otherwise makes known to said submissive/slave/girl/little girl/little boy/boi/fuckmeat/slut/doormat/maid/butler...




yes!  lol... , back to the drawing board then! -

im still fixed with the consent idea tho.  as porcelaine mentioned earlier, few vanillas would agree to having/giving cane strokes that left welts and bruises.  maybe its at the point where it moves from mutual frolics to the requirement of consent. and this would also include the Ds and Ms people who dont do bdsm but live their lives in a non-egalitarian way.

i dont think anyone can disagree that there is a cut off point where it moves from kinky fun to bdsm.  there is a societal distinction that has been made by mainstream folk where recoiling from our activities is visceral.

< Message edited by lally2 -- 5/17/2009 4:51:34 AM >

(in reply to Whiplashsmile4)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: When is vanilla not vanilla? - 5/17/2009 6:51:04 AM   
leadership527


Posts: 5026
Joined: 6/2/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2
and then i got to thinking about the people who are D/s and Ms but engage in very mild kink or no kink atall.  theyre not vanilla.  where do they sit.

This'd be Carol and I and where we "sit" is where we always sat.... in our little whitebread suburban home living our lives. But really, when you look at someplace like collarme, or BDSM as a whole, it is clear these venues are sex based so D/s or M/s without the kink ends up not fitting. I suspect our marriage looks a lot like a 'traditional marriage' just with way more obedience than would commonly be true.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2
i dont think anyone can disagree that there is a cut off point where it moves from kinky fun to bdsm.

And this is exactly WHY D/s or M/s without the kink doesn't fit. If you look at your statement, the unsaid implication is that this is all along some sort of 'kink spectrum'. But what if it was never kinky and never fun to start with? Whatever it matures into, isn't going to be BDSM. So the word 'vanilla' for me then simply becomes a way to say, 'not BDSM' when I'm among BDSM'ers.

Heh, to use Whiplash's example, the situation I find myself in is that I could command my wife to slip her hand into my pants at the movie theater and she would certainly obey despite having a very strong aversion to exhibitionism of any sort. But I'm never going to give that command. So I have some of the same authority tools that BDSM'ers use, but the thing I'm building with those tools is, for the most part, very different.... 'vanilla' is a good enough word.

_____________________________

~Jeff

I didn't so much "enslave" Carol as I did "enlove" her. - Me
I want a joyous, loving, respectful relationship where the male is in charge and deserves to be. - DavanKael

(in reply to lally2)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: When is vanilla not vanilla? - 5/17/2009 10:02:51 AM   
lally2


Posts: 2621
Joined: 4/16/2009
Status: offline 		maybe its at the point where it moves from mutual frolics to the requirement of consent. and this would also include the Ds and Ms people who dont do bdsm but live their lives in a non-egalitarian way. 
 
personally i think that anyone who steps beyond societal comfort zones and into the fringes of this lifestyle sits under the bdsm umbrella - i know of a couple who are strictly Ds without kink but they accept that their way of being does not sit well with their mainstream friends.  she is proudly in service to her Master and her Master is proud of his girl.  and that isnt a lifestyle many vanillas would comfortably witness never mind adopt.

< Message edited by lally2 -- 5/17/2009 10:04:10 AM >

(in reply to leadership527)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: When is vanilla not vanilla? - 5/17/2009 10:11:50 AM   
MzMia


Posts: 5333
Joined: 7/30/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

maybe its at the point where it moves from mutual frolics to the requirement of consent. and this would also include the Ds and Ms people who dont do bdsm but live their lives in a non-egalitarian way. 
 
personally i think that anyone who steps beyond societal comfort zones and into the fringes of this lifestyle sits under the bdsm umbrella - i know of a couple who are strictly Ds without kink but they accept that their way of being does not sit well with their mainstream friends.  she is proudly in service to her Master and her Master is proud of his girl.  and that isnt a lifestyle many vanillas would comfortably witness never mind adopt.


lally, you have hit the nail on the head for me, and what I desire.
I want to modify what you said, a bit and add it to my profile, with your
permission.

I desire a life of service, but with kink thrown in.
The relationship is lived day in and day out, sometimes kink, sometimes NO kink,
but the service is there.
I have so many dreams and desires that have nothing to do with kink, and for me
having a relationship with a submissive in service to me, is what matters most.

Leadership, I agree with Lally, there is no one way only to live this lifestyle.
You and I can sit under this "lifestyle"umbrella, and live this lifestyle if we never go to a munch, hang out at the local BDSM club, or walk around in leather carrying a whip on the weekends!

Many don't realize that even if there is no kink involved, you are FAR from vanilla.
Most vanilla people want to live as equals!

A few of us don't seek to "compartmentalize" our lives, D/s over here, kink over there, family over here, friends over there, desires over here, dreams over there, goals over here, lifes mission over there.
 
This lifestyle can be incorporated into real and daily life, and LIVED, if that is what both parties desire. 
Some of us are not seeking to live this on the weekends, or every other Friday night, part time, or on the 3rd Saturday of each month.

I don't read enough about those that live as you and your wife, Leadership.
The fact that your relationship EXISTS, gives me hope.

Thanks for the sharing another WAY of LIVING this lifestyle, lally and Leadership.
Peace Out!

< Message edited by MzMia -- 5/17/2009 11:05:41 AM >

_____________________________

Namaste'
To Each His/Her Own
"DENIAL ain't just a river in Egypt." Mark Twain


What's your favorite fetish?
"My partner's whisper"--bloomswell

(in reply to lally2)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: When is vanilla not vanilla? - 5/17/2009 10:46:34 AM   
MsDDom


Posts: 368
Joined: 1/1/2009
From: GA
Status: offline 		vanilla ceases when it ventures outside society's "acceptable box" (IMO)...or when u bound and gag someone in the basement ...

_____________________________

...:: MsDDom ::...
... live Life honestly ...

(in reply to stella41b)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: When is vanilla not vanilla? - 5/17/2009 11:03:04 AM   
Andalusite


Posts: 2492
Joined: 1/25/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
in this slave's experience, she heard the term vanilla used to describe the difference between a standard or conventional version and an alternative version of something, such as software products, long before she heard of anyone referring to vanilla meaning "not into D/s or BDSM". 

Sure, I've seen vanilla used in other contexts, but on a D/s and BDSM site, and in the context of relationships, it seems to be pretty clearly used for those who aren't kinky in one way or another, just as "slave" doesn't mean the same thing here as described in Websters or the OED.

There's nothing wrong with someone having a vanilla relationship, and I don't personally use in in a pejorative way, but I get annoyed when people announce that I must be vanilla, when I'm not. It's very similar to the "You can't be bisexual unless you meet my definition" folks, or the ones who argue about whether or not people they aren't involved with are submissive. It's irritating needing to argue about it, when you (both personally, and in general when other people do the same) aren't the one I'm involved with.

If I were vanilla, I wouldn't be open to a D/s relationship or any intense level of kink, and I certainly wouldn't be looking for a partner *here*.

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: When is vanilla not vanilla? - 5/17/2009 11:14:52 AM   
MzMia


Posts: 5333
Joined: 7/30/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andalusite

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
in this slave's experience, she heard the term vanilla used to describe the difference between a standard or conventional version and an alternative version of something, such as software products, long before she heard of anyone referring to vanilla meaning "not into D/s or BDSM". 

Sure, I've seen vanilla used in other contexts, but on a D/s and BDSM site, and in the context of relationships, it seems to be pretty clearly used for those who aren't kinky in one way or another, just as "slave" doesn't mean the same thing here as described in Websters or the OED.

There's nothing wrong with someone having a vanilla relationship, and I don't personally use in in a pejorative way, but I get annoyed when people announce that I must be vanilla, when I'm not. It's very similar to the "You can't be bisexual unless you meet my definition" folks, or the ones who argue about whether or not people they aren't involved with are submissive. It's irritating needing to argue about it, when you (both personally, and in general when other people do the same) aren't the one I'm involved with.

If I were vanilla, I wouldn't be open to a D/s relationship or any intense level of kink, and I certainly wouldn't be looking for a partner *here*.


Do you come here thinking you have to "prove" something to the kink community?
If people announce that you are vanilla, let them announce it and move on.
Do you let others define how you define yourself, or live your life? 
As nasty as my mind can be, I am honored to be called vanilla.
I love to be under the radar, that is how I roll.
Make my fucking day.
<--vanilla Mia

< Message edited by MzMia -- 5/17/2009 11:24:15 AM >

_____________________________

Namaste'
To Each His/Her Own
"DENIAL ain't just a river in Egypt." Mark Twain


What's your favorite fetish?
"My partner's whisper"--bloomswell

(in reply to Andalusite)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: When is vanilla not vanilla? - 5/17/2009 11:54:19 AM   
porcelaine


Posts: 5020
Joined: 7/24/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Whiplashsmile4

I almost hate to say this, but some people are more inclined towards TPE while others are not. Those that are more TPE inclined have fewer issues with doing things that their Dom/Master/Sir/Daddy/Mistress/Domme/Lord/OverLord/Owner/Queen (additional label nausiam) wants, needs, asks, requests, orders, commands or otherwise makes known to said submissive/slave/girl/little girl/little boy/boi/fuckmeat/slut/doormat/maid/butler...



bingo! which is why i asked in the first place. for some this is a simple act of service. however, i don't view those that don't yield in this way less submissive nor vanilla. a girl could comply and be perfectly at ease in doing so, but reject the notion of submission altogether. she may just enjoy taking risks as you've mentioned. on the other hand the deed could be uncomfortable for someone who genuinely has a desire to serve and please. there's always more than meets the eye.

porcelaine


_____________________________

His will; my fate.

(in reply to Whiplashsmile4)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: When is vanilla not vanilla? - 5/17/2009 12:03:36 PM   
porcelaine


Posts: 5020
Joined: 7/24/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andalusite

Sure, I've seen vanilla used in other contexts, but on a D/s and BDSM site, and in the context of relationships, it seems to be pretty clearly used for those who aren't kinky in one way or another, just as "slave" doesn't mean the same thing here as described in Websters or the OED.


pretty clear? how so, when a barrage of threads go south because someone's interpretation of another person's comments is divergently different from what he or she intended. i don't think a consensus exists at all. you can't possibly know what i mean or implied unless i make it known and even then i could be blowing smoke. not like that doesn't happen.

we can only express our reality, what is true for us. everything else is really an assumption. since you can never be in that person's head.

porcelaine


_____________________________

His will; my fate.

(in reply to Andalusite)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: When is vanilla not vanilla? - 5/17/2009 12:04:52 PM   
porcelaine


Posts: 5020
Joined: 7/24/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MzMia

Do you come here thinking you have to "prove" something to the kink community?
If people announce that you are vanilla, let them announce it and move on.
Do you let others define how you define yourself, or live your life? 
As nasty as my mind can be, I am honored to be called vanilla.
I love to be under the radar, that is how I roll.
Make my fucking day.
<--vanilla Mia


simply priceless!

porcelaine


_____________________________

His will; my fate.

(in reply to MzMia)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: When is vanilla not vanilla? - 5/18/2009 8:05:25 AM   
Andalusite


Posts: 2492
Joined: 1/25/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MzMia
Do you come here thinking you have to "prove" something to the kink community?
If people announce that you are vanilla,et them announce it and move on.
Do you let others define how you define yourself, or live your life? 


*shrugs* I don't have to "prove" something, but it's a little annoying when other people feel they know my sexual/BDSM orientation better than I do, whether it is directed at me as an individual, or at all switches/bisexuals/anyone who isn't in a D/s relationship. I'm not going to lose any sleep over it, or get truly angry, but I usually will be a bit vocal about why I disagree with them.

I have my own definitions for various things, but I feel it is a good idea to accept others' self-identification, rather than argue with them! My definitions may or may not change based on what they have to say, but I'm not involved with them!

porcelaine, why is it so important to your reality to be allowed to decide who and what *I* am?

(in reply to MzMia)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: When is vanilla not vanilla? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Jump to:





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
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109