barring fantasies what is the difference

barring fantasies what is the difference (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Submissive

Message

osf -> barring fantasies what is the difference (3/14/2010 7:58:00 AM)
barring fantasies what do submissives see as the major difference between vanilla men and dominant men I'm not talking about being in control of their everyday life even sub men can do that and be leaders the question is about what the difference that affects you directly in the relationship i don't think kink is a major part of the answer

UniqueRaven -> RE: barring fantasies what is the difference (3/14/2010 9:14:10 AM)
Empathic intuition, combined with a certain amount of sensitivity and a strong, almost innate - and very powerful - desire to Possess.

osf -> RE: barring fantasies what is the difference (3/14/2010 9:25:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: UniqueRaven Empathic intuition, combined with a certain amount of sensitivity and a strong, almost innate - and very powerful - desire to Possess. along with the need to own is a need to control, they are inseparable for me

dreamerdreaming -> RE: barring fantasies what is the difference (3/14/2010 9:38:34 AM)
Fast reply: Their needs and desires, of course. [8\|]

UniqueRaven -> RE: barring fantasies what is the difference (3/14/2010 9:47:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: osf quote: ORIGINAL: UniqueRaven Empathic intuition, combined with a certain amount of sensitivity and a strong, almost innate - and very powerful - desire to Possess. along with the need to own is a need to control, they are inseparable for me Yes, i would add "and to Control" on the end of my statement. [:)]

lucylucy -> RE: barring fantasies what is the difference (3/14/2010 9:50:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: osf quote: ORIGINAL: UniqueRaven Empathic intuition, combined with a certain amount of sensitivity and a strong, almost innate - and very powerful - desire to Possess. along with the need to own is a need to control, they are inseparable for me I'll just build on what you two have said. There's a need to own and control, yes, but it seems to me that it's such an inborn need that a Dominant simply owns and controls. It's the flipside of my submission--I don't think of it so much as what I do as what I am. "I submit" isn't nearly as accurate as "I am submissive." I would think this is also true for a Dominant--that "I dominate" isn't as accurate as "I am dominant."

osf -> RE: barring fantasies what is the difference (3/14/2010 9:53:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lucylucy quote: ORIGINAL: osf quote: ORIGINAL: UniqueRaven Empathic intuition, combined with a certain amount of sensitivity and a strong, almost innate - and very powerful - desire to Possess. along with the need to own is a need to control, they are inseparable for me I'll just build on what you two have said. There's a need to own and control, yes, but it seems to me that it's such an inborn need that a Dominant simply owns and controls. It's the flipside of my submission--I don't think of it so much as what I do as what I am. "I submit" isn't nearly as accurate as "I am submissive." I would think this is also true for a Dominant--that "I dominate" isn't as accurate as "I am dominant." to have the innate desire/need to conform to the role you find most natural when I'm with a vanilla women i have an out of body feeling and have to take care of how I behave

fragilepieces -> RE: barring fantasies what is the difference (3/14/2010 10:45:13 AM)
A dominant man state he is dominant whereas a vanilla man will not state he is vanilla and look at you dumb if you asked.

alittleevil -> RE: barring fantasies what is the difference (3/14/2010 11:12:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: osf barring fantasies what do submissives see as the major difference between vanilla men and dominant men I'm not talking about being in control of their everyday life even sub men can do that and be leaders the question is about what the difference that affects you directly in the relationship i don't think kink is a major part of the answer Hello, No, kink is not a major part of the answer here. Bondage or elaborate SM (as opposed to the random slap, spank, choke, bite or pinch) are a very rare part of Master's sex life at this time. This could change five minutes from now, who knows, but it certainly isn't central to what makes him dominant. That (dominance) just is as much a part of him--and our life--as the color of his hair. SM is more like the way he likes his coffee. The major difference that i see is in the way one defines "vanilla." I've known plenty of dominant but sexually vanilla men (well...maybe more like vanilla with a little cinnamon and ginger added--yum), and i would have been just fine with one of those. It's the aura of personal power, confidence with a dash of presumptuousness and the expectation that people will just naturally fall in line behind them that i thrill to. Most of these men would not in a million years have considered themselves "a dominant" in the BDSM way, but had one of them demanded it i could have knelt to them in a heartbeat. They did not, however. So, to my experience one real difference between Master and these men is that he made the conscious, deliberate choice to seek a power dynamic among women who were also deliberately seeking the same. He sought ownership of a girl and it made his life a little easier to look among those who sought to be owned. He's had sexually vanilla women, and his demeanor and behavior differed very little when with them but in the long run, that rock bottom expectation that he will be obeyed and served was easiest to have met when he found a slave as opposed to a girlfriend. That, i guess, is the difference--the expectation and the conscious choice to seek the counterpart of his desires. Best, aj

MasterSlaveLA -> RE: barring fantasies what is the difference (3/14/2010 12:11:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: osf ...the major difference between vanilla men and dominant men Easy... one tastes great, the other is less filling. [;)]

lovingpet -> RE: barring fantasies what is the difference (3/14/2010 1:28:00 PM)
Amen to all of the above replies, but I will add something of my own too. It is a very nuanced and detailed knowledge of me that vanilla men neither seem to want or need to function successfully within an intimate relationship. I have to develop the same knowledge of him. I find that kind of attention to detail very attractive indeed. Also, I think it is the difference between sharing two lives and giving one life to be swallowed up by the other. There may or may not be a huge difference in my everyday life, but the fact that all is unified makes for a more desirable dynamic to me. In a shared life, there are a great many things we know about each other and have in common. In an owned life, the knowledge, hopes, and dreams are total. I go where my owner goes. His dreams include my own or have been sacrificed for his. This is absolute and there is no room for disagreement. It is settled from the start and there doesn't get to be resentment and a sense of being neglected or taken for granted. I know where we are going and what we want to achieve. If I had doubts, they should have been dealt with long ago. If they arise later, he need only refocus me on what we intended from the beginning. I guess for me it is about the oneness with someone else that doesn't seem to happen in vanilla relationship. I hear all the time and experience how most men talk about not understanding women or being surprised or there being so much mystery about their partners. Women seem to be equally clueless. I don't want someone to not have much of a clue what I need or what my aspirations are. I don't feel any security when I don't know similar about my partner. I'm not terribly mysterious. I don't like surprises all that much. When it comes to knowing who each other are, I want to know what's in the box. I also want to know what our box holds should we decide to continue together through life. lovingpet

Dominasola -> RE: barring fantasies what is the difference (3/14/2010 2:32:17 PM)
Although I have limited experience, from what I HAVE experienced and observed is that D-types make it a priority to establish harmony in their relationships...in whatever form that may manifest. I suppose this desire for harmony can be included under the umbrella of the desire to control, but I would argue that s-types also have harmony as a main priority. Although most people likely want harmonious relationships, the amount of energy that is spent arguing and fighting between those in "vanilla" relationships (I know this is a gross generalization) suggests that perhaps solving a domestic conflict peacefully isn't as important as getting one's own way. I definitely am not intending to reduce all vanilla relationships to quarrels and imbalance (my own parents, for example, have been married for over 30 years and I have never, ever seen them argue), but articles like this one seem to ENCOURAGE a certain degree of fighting in partnerships.

wisdomtogive -> RE: barring fantasies what is the difference (3/14/2010 4:00:05 PM)
Actually a good question osf, and one that i have been trying to find the answer too. I don't see a difference per sey. So, i had to go back to my marriage and late husband to review our life. He was a very controlling man. Everyone knew it. We just werent into bdsm kink. So the vanilla relationship vs the M/s relationship, as well as D/s has left me with the opinion, no difference if you were already with a dominant already.

Andalusite -> RE: barring fantasies what is the difference (3/14/2010 4:22:46 PM)
I only dated a couple of vanilla men before my first D/s relationship. In general, what I want from a man in a relationship is mostly independent of his D/s or BDSM orientation - he needs to be interesting to talk with and spend time with, we need chemistry and reasonably compatible playstyles/limits, he needs to have integrity, be caring, and so forth. The primary difference isn't so much kink, as my willingness to cede authority to them in areas outside of kink, and how driven I am to please and obey them even in things that are scary for me, or that I don't like. I'm usually willing to be helpful and do nice things for my partner even when there isn't a D/s dynamic in place, but I don't feel as driven to, or as satisfied by it. I don't get that sense of being an extension of their will.

DesFIP -> RE: barring fantasies what is the difference (3/14/2010 6:06:34 PM)
The desire to have not just rights, but the responsibilities also.

takemeforyourown -> RE: barring fantasies what is the difference (3/14/2010 6:23:48 PM)
My vanilla husband wants to please me. My Dom wanted me to please him, which pleased me.

littlewonder -> RE: barring fantasies what is the difference (3/14/2010 6:28:28 PM)
I don't see a difference. I don't call people "vanilla". I don't call people "doms" or "subs". I am simply attracted to dominant personality men whether they call themselves "doms" or even know what "bdsm" is. I like men who are leaders, who are confident, strong, like to take control of not just their own lives but the lives of others, they have a high self esteem and they looove power.

myotherself -> RE: barring fantasies what is the difference (3/15/2010 12:37:01 AM)
In my personal experience, I've always been attracted to dominant men, whether they were vanilla or part of this lifestyle (for want of a better term). Sadly the kind of vanilla guys who were dominant enough for me tended to be arrogant assholes, forever trumpeting their own superiority. Fortunately the bdsm-ers who are dominant enough for me tend to be intelligent, self-aware human beings who are not scared to show their 'fluffy' side too.[:D]

chamberqueen -> RE: barring fantasies what is the difference (3/15/2010 3:04:15 AM)
I was in two vanilla marriages where I basically ended up in the role of a slave but without any true appreciation for what I was doing. The men dominated me by fear of the reprisals if I did not do my best, and even when I did their anger could flare. (In the second marriage I found that he was actually angrier because I did not fail; he was setting me up to so that he could look better.) In my M/s relationship I am appreciated for doing my tasks well and for putting my Master first. Communication and the levels of trust go beyond what I ever could have imagined. I am allowed to use creativity and my intelligence to please my Master and am never expected to simply be a doormat. For the first time in my life I am truly flourishing; he takes pride in my vanilla accomplishments as well as in the things that I do for him, and it makes me strive harder than ever. To be fair, a lot of that has as much to do with the personalities involved as with whether someone is in or out of the lifestyle. In my case the man who could bring out the best in me and help me to grow as a person is a Master. If anything were to happen to him I don't know if I would look for another or go vanilla - all I know is that it would have to be someone who could continue to allow me to shine for their glory.

ownedbyPF -> RE: barring fantasies what is the difference (3/15/2010 7:21:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lovingpet Amen to all of the above replies, but I will add something of my own too. It is a very nuanced and detailed knowledge of me that vanilla men neither seem to want or need to function successfully within an intimate relationship. I have to develop the same knowledge of him. I find that kind of attention to detail very attractive indeed. Also, I think it is the difference between sharing two lives and giving one life to be swallowed up by the other. There may or may not be a huge difference in my everyday life, but the fact that all is unified makes for a more desirable dynamic to me. In a shared life, there are a great many things we know about each other and have in common. In an owned life, the knowledge, hopes, and dreams are total. I go where my owner goes. His dreams include my own or have been sacrificed for his. This is absolute and there is no room for disagreement. It is settled from the start and there doesn't get to be resentment and a sense of being neglected or taken for granted. I know where we are going and what we want to achieve. If I had doubts, they should have been dealt with long ago. If they arise later, he need only refocus me on what we intended from the beginning. lovingpet Along side the comments of ownership and possession this! ~s

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875