RE: What is vanilla? (Full Version)

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



Message

LillyoftheVally -> RE: What is vanilla? (8/31/2009 9:27:14 AM)

I do not think it is always that based in conflict, happy relationships require power exchange also. My mother is very submissive to her current partner, but was dominant to my father, my sister is always dominant, and the other always submissive. These may not be recognised let alone resented. So I think leaderships qualifier of building on it is interesting. However, what if a person wants something specific, are on BDSM boards, do not identify personally as vanilla but do not want to grow, or change, just want a specific element, be that dressing up or spanking or whatever



leadership527 -> RE: What is vanilla? (8/31/2009 10:10:27 AM)

Lily:

let me use Carol & I as a perfect example. We were vanilla for 13 years before the collar. During all that time, I was still me and she was still her.. that is to say, a dominant and submissive personality. But that aspect of our relationship went by largely un-noticed and we certainly did not consicously built on it. Compare that to now when we are specifically holding that part of ourselves up to the light and seeking to enhance & refine it.

edited to add: Oh yes, and to support your point with Lally2, despite us being "vanilla" at the time, my dominance and her submission was not an abusive dynamic.



Mercnbeth -> RE: What is vanilla? (8/31/2009 11:16:13 AM)

quote:

...let me use Carol & I as a perfect example. We were vanilla for 13 years before the collar. During all that time, I was still me and she was still her.. that is to say, a dominant and submissive personality. But that aspect of our relationship went by largely un-noticed and we certainly did not consicously built on it. Compare that to now when we are specifically holding that part of ourselves up to the light and seeking to enhance & refine it...


using your example, Jeff, this slave's position on "vanilla" is as follows:
 
this slave doesn't consider people or activites "vanilla".  you had a relationship, based on the conventional version---a marriage between two people of the opposite sex---"vanilla"----until you consciously decided to craft your relationship differently than the "vanilla" version.
 
call it D/s, M/s, TPE, TAT, flavored with sprinkles, whatever...it isn't the conventional---"vanilla"---version that you previously enjoyed.
 
using Master and His slave as an example:
 
our relationship is built on the foundation of a Master/slave dynamic.  getting married after being His slave for 3 years did not change our dynamic into a vanilla one, just because we went through the process of a conventional marriage.
 
when our society accepts and acknowledges gay marriage, poly pairings and Master/slave contracts as just as meaningful and lawful as the conventional version of a relationship (marriage or long-term cohabitation of two opposite sex individuals) then this slave might change her perception of the terms "alternative" and "vanilla" as it pertains to versions of relationships.
 
this slave doesn't believe either version is inherently "better", just different.



leadership527 -> RE: What is vanilla? (8/31/2009 11:22:57 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
our relationship is built on the foundation of a Master/slave dynamic.  getting married after being His slave for 3 years did not change our dynamic into a vanilla one, just because we went through the process of a conventional marriage.

Big surprise here, but I agree with everything you said Beth. The point you noted above though was partcularly intriguing to me. I could flip that around and say:

our relationship is built on the foundation of a vanilla dynamic. Collaring Carol after being her husband for 11 years did not change our dynamic into a kinky one just because we went through the process of a kinky collaring.

That statement I suspect, explains a lot of the divergence between my relationship and yours despite the authority dynamic common to both. As I think on it, about the only thing that changed when Carol accepted my collar was that I made all the decisions.

I personally think that "better" can be defined as "that which puts more smiles on our faces" but I remain intrigued with both the differences and similarities between mine and other people's relationships.



Apocalypso -> RE: What is vanilla? (8/31/2009 4:15:09 PM)

]
quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeptha
But I still think it's useful to be able to differentiate between those who share whatever your particular predilection is and those who aren't interested in it.

Are you asserting that such distinctions aren't useful - or that they are inevitably condescending because the whole "us/them" mindset is pretentious?

I'd assert that it's more useful to actually look at specific predilections. As Lilly has pointed out, there's a very strong argument that every relationship contains some kind of power exchanges, and I'd include friendships in that.

It's more then the fact it's pretentious. I think the us/them mindset on this is, or at least can be, highly counterproductive.  For the BDSM 'community' as a whole, I believe what's needed in society generally is widespread acceptance that what consenting adults do is their own business.  The 'othering' attitude that often comes with the term 'vanilla' actually holds that process back for me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: allthatjaz
So what your saying is that people that use the word 'vanilla' are bigging themselves up?


Not always, but I think that's the case it with the way it's used a lot of the time.  Or to put others down.  I do think it's sometimes used roughly in the same way "breeder" is used to describe hets.

quote:

I was speaking to a woman the other day who believed there was no such thing as 'vanilla people'. She refuses to be discreet about what she does, even in front of her children and family because as far as she is concerned her children will grow into it and the rest of her family are already at it!
Some people within this lifestyle really become delusional

That strikes me as her using BDSM as a justification for being an idiot more than anything.  (Consideration for others isn't reliant on using the term 'vanilla'.  In fact, the flipside of my argument that my sexlife is my business is that I don't insist on other people having it shoved in their faces).

quote:

I on the other hand think of my entire family as vanilla and I wouldn't start to expect any of them to understand. I certainly don't believe I am better than them by calling them that and I know with certainty that they are not boring.
Because I understand and accept what vanilla is, it enables me to protect myself and others and allows me to identify those people who are likely to be emotionally troubled by what I do and reminds me not to make them unwilling participants.

Again, why is that reliant on the term vanilla?  One of the big issues I have with it is that I think we should let people choose their own definitions, as opposed to having them forced upon them. In the same way as we'd object if we were having a term for BDSMers being decided on by other people.



tashina -> RE: What is vanilla? (8/31/2009 4:29:21 PM)

Vanilla is what I use to add flavor.  It is an ingredient, but alone it isn't worth much, it is not until you include more than one ingredient that things taste better.  To me being vanilla is like having just one ingredient in your life.  I much prefer to spice things up.



rednicky -> RE: What is vanilla? (8/31/2009 6:58:25 PM)

Well what do you know...I'm pictophilic.



Jeptha -> RE: What is vanilla? (8/31/2009 9:35:51 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LillyoftheVally

How many people do not do dominance and submission to some extent? I have yet to see a relationship without that as a back drop

It must be where you're hanging out, because I certainly don't see that.
Maybe it's a generational thing.
I think maybe young people are so saturated with sexual images/marketing that it takes a lot just to stand out from the background noise.

Of the middle-agish couples I know, I don't see D/s involved in the picture at all.

(Of course, perhaps it's just that I'm not priviledge to those details...)

Vanilla has no concrete meaning. It just means "someone who's not into whatever I'm into". Thus, I'm someone's vanilla, and even raging kinksters could be mine, I suppose.

When used generally, like on this site, it means people who generally aren't into any of the class of things we might generally be into.

Yeah, it doesn't mean much. Until you try and spring that little thing you like to do on a partner who thinks it's sick and degrading.

Then you discover that it's not a bad idea to do some differentiating.

But sure ~ the conservative christian couple down the street could have a psyche-twisting relationship for all I know, or in comparison with myself.
Who knows?




LillyoftheVally -> RE: What is vanilla? (9/1/2009 3:21:30 AM)

I guess Jeptha a good way to define it in the terms that some people use is 's/he wears the trousers in this relationship'



JustStephen -> RE: What is vanilla? (9/1/2009 5:27:57 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Apocalypso



quote:

I on the other hand think of my entire family as vanilla and I wouldn't start to expect any of them to understand. I certainly don't believe I am better than them by calling them that and I know with certainty that they are not boring.
Because I understand and accept what vanilla is, it enables me to protect myself and others and allows me to identify those people who are likely to be emotionally troubled by what I do and reminds me not to make them unwilling participants.

Again, why is that reliant on the term vanilla?  One of the big issues I have with it is that I think we should let people choose their own definitions, as opposed to having them forced upon them. In the same way as we'd object if we were having a term for BDSMers being decided on by other people.


The only way they can choose there own definitions is to introduce them to the concept. Perhaps you do that but I don't because to do that would mean outing myself.
Vanilla is just a code word for 'they are not into this' its nothing more than that. Its not a code word that these people are boring but a word that tells us to be careful. There should be absolutely no reason they know we use this code. The only reason they know is if some bafoon tells them and then thats kind of defeating the object.
Its no different than using the word 'straight'
It is not making a decision on other people. Its used as a reminder that these people are not into the same sort of stuff we are into. If you get rid of the word vanilla then another word will just take its place.

Maria (allthatjaz)



IronBear -> RE: What is vanilla? (9/1/2009 6:46:15 AM)

Vanilla is a flavoring derived from orchids of the genus Vanilla native to Mexico. Etymologically, vanilla derives from the Spanish word "vainilla", little pod. Originally cultivated by Pre-Columbian Mesoamerican peoples, Spanish conquistador Hernán Cortés is credited with introducing both the spice and chocolate to Europe in the 1520s

There are currently three major cultivars of vanilla grown globally, all derived from a species originally found in Mesoamerica, including parts of modern day Mexico.[5] The various subspecies are Vanilla planifolia (syn. V. fragrans), grown on Madagascar, Réunion and other tropical areas along the Indian Ocean; V. tahitensis, grown in the South Pacific; and V. pompona, found in the West Indies, Central and South America.The majority of the world's vanilla is the V. planifolia variety, more commonly known as "Madagascar-Bourbon" vanilla, which is produced in a small region of Madagascar and in Indonesia.


(From Wikipedia)

It usually within the BDSM and Kink Communities, refers to not BDSM or Kink folk. Personally I prefer to use the term Mundane. I supose one could rate the intensity of commitment to BDSM and/or Kink as to how much of their waking life is "Vanilla/Mundane"





Andalusite -> RE: What is vanilla? (9/1/2009 8:30:27 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeptha
I agree that "vanilla" does sound condescending with it's connotation of blandness (and conversely, thereby, the "interestingness" of the speaker who uses the term...) But I still think it's useful to be able to differentiate between those who share whatever your particular predilection is and those who aren't interested in it.

Are you asserting that such distinctions aren't useful - or that they are inevitably condescending because the whole "us/them" mindset is pretentious?

I think it gets used two ways here - usefully toward people who aren't interested in kink at all, and as an insult toward other people who they don't view as kinky enough. I think it's absurd when someone who's into D/s insists on calling people who get caned, singletailed, hogtied, etc. "vanilla." In my book, if someone is into spanking and bondage, they aren't vanilla, even if they don't choose to apply any specific BDSM orientation labels to themselves.

Lilly, I've had several "egalitarian kinky" relationships, leaning slightly Dominant, but without any formal or extensive D/s interaction. I've had a submissive for 5 years, a Dominant for 3 years, and have been a slave for 3 months now. I interact with people very differently when we have a power exchange dynamic than just being a little bit bossy or whatever. Most people I meet, who I'm not in a relationship with, are pretty much dead-on neutral in terms of power, even if they identify as dominant or submissive toward other people.



Jeptha -> RE: What is vanilla? (9/1/2009 10:48:59 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LillyoftheVally

I guess Jeptha a good way to define it in the terms that some people use is 's/he wears the trousers in this relationship'

I think I know some couples who are a little like that, but from what I see (and I admit I'm just a casual sort of observer), I would call it something a lot different from conscious power exchange. Power struggle, maybe, sometimes... but I think it's more compromise that I see, where no one person is "wearing the pants" all the time.

For instance, when I was growing up, the woman might rule in the kitchen, but the guy would hide in the basement workshop. Or just not come home at all half the time (boating, fishing, bowling, etc.) Or be emotionally shut down when at home (that could happen to either spouse, or both.)
Liberally mix in alcohol at some point, and shake.

Nothing that I would call a really high functioning power exchange.



Fevery -> RE: What is vanilla? (9/10/2009 2:58:21 AM)

I used to believe everyone had at least some kinky desires, and those who claimed they didn't were lying to themselves out of fear or shame.

There is at least one man on the planet who actually is what I consider vanilla. I know because I married him. (*facepalm*. Long story; dumb choice. Learned my lesson! Moving on...)

Beyond the occasional human urge for sexual release, he claimed to have never had any fantasies or desires. The only activities he would engage in were oral performed on him, and vaginal intercourse in either the missionary or doggie positions. He was uninterested in mentally or emotionally stimulating verbal communication during sex. No adult videos or toys, no lingerie, no spanking, no restraint, not even whipped cream/chocolate sauce, no roleplay... nothing beyond bj's and 'vanilla' sex.

I kept trying to 'open' him - break down a barrier I *just knew* was inside of him. I tried for three years to entice him with all I knew and with my creativity. I finally had to accept there was no block. He was simply that basic, sexually.

So, even in this era, there are still vanilla people out there. I don't think there are many left who are as plain as he, though.




mixielicous -> RE: What is vanilla? (9/10/2009 8:52:15 AM)

fast reply,

when watching the patriots game last thursday the commentator described our defense as, you guessed it, vanilla. boring. unadventurous.

to me, vanilla is the group of people who are unaware of lifestyle, or judge/look down on me for my interest in it. Some are kinky, some are not.



TurboJugend -> RE: What is vanilla? (9/10/2009 9:02:29 AM)

at op

personally I dislike all this vanilla / bdsm ....we and them... discussions.
so many vanilla's do kinky stuff in the bedroom...and we go to their shops...so we are even..lol



SouthernSpankin -> RE: What is vanilla? (9/10/2009 9:47:13 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mixielicous

fast reply,

when watching the patriots game last thursday the commentator described our defense as, you guessed it, vanilla. boring. unadventurous.


The term "vanilla" has always made sense to me as meaning just, like you said, "boring, unadventurous." Looking it up, I'm not surprised that the dictionary describes it as an adjective meaning "Lacking adornments or special features; basic or ordinary: “We went through a period of vanilla cars” (Charles Jordan)."

http://www.answers.com/vanilla



SouthernSpankin -> RE: What is vanilla? (9/10/2009 9:51:41 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Apocalypso

It's a term used to 'prove' that the speaker is cool and hip, not withstanding all the evidence to the contrary.


Yeah, I can see how the term "vanilla" is a little more cool and hip than wearing straight cut Wrangler blue jeans and an otherwise boring outfit. But I've never thought of it as that much cooler and hip than any other regular term in the English language. Now when I see the people on here that use the term 'nilla -- I can see how that is cool and hip, and it doesn't bother me when people do that.



shadowowl -> RE: What is vanilla? (9/10/2009 10:33:36 AM)

Vanilla is a fantasy world of denial that people that oppress themselves and others, try to live in.  ;) 



MasterSlaveLA -> RE: What is vanilla? (9/10/2009 1:26:15 PM)

Hmmm.... I rather like both of the below statements...

From a Kink Standpoint:

quote:

ORIGINAL: littlewonder
...people use the term "vanilla" to make it seem as if they are somehow different or special or set apart from everyone else when imo that just isn't the truth at all.



From a Non-Kink Standpoint:

quote:

ORIGINAL: mixielicous
...vanilla is the group of people who are unaware of this lifestyle, or who judge/look down on me for my interest in it. Some are kinky, some are not.





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

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125