Ownining a vanilla guy (Full Version)

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



Message


johnnytheguy -> Ownining a vanilla guy (4/26/2014 1:42:47 PM)

Is it possible for a mistress to own a vanilla guy?

So that he is still hers, and owned, and submissive, but in a more vanilla way... and that his vanilla-ness is acknowledged?

Can you be attracted to vanilla guys? What would happen if you found a guy who is extremely attractive, just a perfect type of guy for you, but vanilla?




angelikaJ -> RE: Ownining a vanilla guy (4/26/2014 1:50:29 PM)

There is a difference between BDSM and kink and D/s (Dominance and submission).

If the vanilla guy is willing to be owned, is willing for her to lead their relationship, then why couldn't he be owned as you describe?




pleasemsbliss -> RE: Ownining a vanilla guy (4/26/2014 4:06:05 PM)

Please explain what you mean by "vanilla". If a man wants to be owned by a Mistress and will subscribe to the "rules" set by the Mistress, he is by definition submissive. It would be helpful to hear more details as to what the OP thinks vanilla means or how does he see his potential relationship with a Mistress as a vanilla man.

Most submissive men (the ones I like anyway) have full vanilla lives. I have a full vanilla life. It's almost impossible not being vanilla in some way. What is your interest in asking these questions?





johnnytheguy -> RE: Ownining a vanilla guy (4/26/2014 11:59:33 PM)

The difference is that some things that would be extremely blissful or erotic for a more typical submissive or slave type, for vanilla guy would be "what a drag".
Like having some silly rules, protocols, titles, etc.
He might submit to all of that, to please you, but he wouldn't enjoy it because he doesn't have a natural need for this.
Vanilla guy would just like to help you have best possible life and fulfill your needs, without going too much in a kinky direction.
He would put you on a first place, but would feel a bit bad or silly if he needed to obey some rules that other people would consider very kinky.




FightingChains -> RE: Ownining a vanilla guy (4/27/2014 12:24:56 AM)

Everyone has their own brand of how they want to do life. People shouldn't be "blocked in" or forced to be something they're not, just because some extremists with lots of protocol and ritual say "this is how to be submissive and dominant".

Some people prefer for the relationship to just be led by one person somewhat, without kink or ritual, or orders, protocols, titles.
Some want kink and led by one person, but no "out of the bedroom" protocol.

Some people, like me, hate "kinkiness" and just have their own brand of being.

My advice is that every relationship is a combination of two people. Is the woman happy for the relationship to just be a "female led relationship" without all the kink and protocol and BDSM? Can the 'sub' be happy with how she would like the relationship run? Compromise here is key. You can find a domme who's happy to be like this, and I know some myself who are like this.

My advice is everyone should stop getting caught up in what things are "supposed to be" and find what works for them.




FieryOpal -> RE: Owning a vanilla guy (4/27/2014 1:59:03 AM)

Honestly johnny (formerly lec, and thanks for letting us know elsewhere you had to change accounts), I don't know how many ways we can tell you that Dominance/submission does not require any BDSM involvement whatsoever. It usually does, but that's a personal choice. What you absolutely don't have to accept is a sadistic Mistress, and all you have to do is ask. They are very straightforward about this and have no ulterior motives in trying to trick an unsuspecting submissive.

I am going to take a position which another forum regular opposed in no uncertain terms, but I will state this again herein, and if nobody else agrees, they're entitled to their opinion. The main difference between D/s which incorporates BDSM and D/s which doesn't is the issue of mutual consensuality. This type of consent is explicit, but can also be implicit. The primary difference is that with both BDSM and trans-vanilla D/s (for lack of a better term), consent can always be withdrawn. Vanilla D/s is often implemented on a non-consensual or loosely consensual basis, without a verbally-honored escape clause, and therefore the risk of domestic abuse runs high in those relationships. For example, religious women who have been inculcated to believe the husband must always be head of household, and give their blanket consent, only to discover later that they feel they are being held hostage within their own marriage. (e.g. the pastor's wife with the non-consensually kinky husband who anally raped and humiliated her regularly during sex, until she finally snapped and out came the shotgun; the brainwashed and mentally disturbed wife Andrea Yeager who drowned her own children in the bathtub, etc.) This kind of vanilla marital dominance over a spouse is NOT BDSM. It is not entered into with eyes wide open.

Dominance/submission dynamics in general are so wide-reaching, wide-ranging and ubiquitous, that they permeate the fabric of all of our lives. Besides civil authorities, employment situations, academics, sports, and so forth (not to mention the armed forces), think of your own parent's marriage. Your aunts & uncles, your grandparents. Think who was in charge for the most part. In some marriages, the husband's authority went unchallenged. In others, the wife ruled the roost or wore the pants in the family. Chances are none of these relatives were involved in BDSM. There is a remote possibility there may have been Domestic Discipline engaged in between spouses behind closed doors, but that's about it.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that you are over-thinking this to the point where you've posted nearly a handful of questions that are similar, and you keep hoping to get different answers, is it? I don't understand the purpose of this approach.

[Edited for proofreading]




johnnytheguy -> RE: Ownining a vanilla guy (4/27/2014 2:46:32 AM)

OK, generally I get what you're all trying to tell me, and thanks for your help.

I changed accounts because I deleted the old one, but I realized that I can still use it on the forum.

Then I changed my mind and wanted an account, so I made the new one.




SeekingTrinity -> RE: Ownining a vanilla guy (4/27/2014 9:03:01 AM)

~FRing it~

Female Led Relationships (FLRs) come in kink and vanilla favors...and everything inbetween. It's more a matter of finding a compatible partner who is looking for something similar to what you seek




MistressLeSang -> RE: Ownining a vanilla guy (4/28/2014 8:32:38 AM)

My late husband was an alpha vanilla guy in public and a very kinky owned submissive at home. We had blissful TPE weekends and romantic days with exciting sex and lots of kisses. We all need to have `vanilla cover` in modern world unless we live in a castle somewhere. :) We are all unique. Whatever works for you is right.
Good luck.




johnnytheguy -> RE: Ownining a vanilla guy (4/28/2014 8:39:09 AM)

Wow that seems very appealing to me. I mean there is something blissful in strong kinks and maybe even TPE. But at least fot me that would get old very soon if practiced constantly. I need this balance between vanilla and kink. I would probably enjoy both romantic days with kisses and sex, as well as those kinky weekends. :)




DesFIP -> RE: Ownining a vanilla guy (4/29/2014 8:21:32 PM)

Then look for someone who feels the same way.

And stop watching porn. Because I have to assume that's where you're getting your ideas that a domme would drag her husband through the mall, berating him for being a lowly worm unable to satisfy her in bed while clerks scurried to get her thigh high boots in the color and size she needs.




AAkasha -> RE: Ownining a vanilla guy (4/29/2014 8:46:30 PM)



I had relationships with many vanilla men (long-term, several years) prior to marriage. Yes, it can work.

For me, the sensual/kinky/lust side of my femdom persona runs in cycles almost. I get more intense/demanding sexually and more kinky often when I am overworked or not getting enough rest, or coming off of a big project. If I don't scratch the itch, it intensifies. I go through several day periods where I get pretty bondage-obsessed. I feel predatory and seductive.

Once I get it out of my system, I go back to "normal." Normal can mean just having totally vanilla thoughts and emotions or perhaps thinking about S&M but not needing to engage in it.

With vanilla men, I found it was great to let the urges build up and then express them over a weekend, for example. The drawback of being with a vanilla guy is he didn't understand that S&M wasn't just a fleeting interest - when I wanted it, I wanted it bad. Being told "not tonight honey, I have a headache" would drive me insane. Vanilla men don't understand what it feels like to be that compelled to be cruel and sadistic. It would take a lot of communication and understanding.

Even when I was not in "femdom mode" I still was always in more of a 'female led' relationship in that I was always the more aggressive person, more outgoing, etc. That doesn't mean I wanted a partner who was meek and totally agreeing with me or a "yes ma'am!" type all the time; for the most parts, we were equals. But I always found myself with men who were more into pleasing, liked a woman who knew what she wanted, etc. It's a matter of chemistry.

My husband (who I met online in a kink related way) is more vanilla than submissive, and more "sensually kinky" than a masochist - so it works out perfect. He was 10 years younger when we courted and was more of a boytoy to my "successful career" type persona - even lived as my houseboy/sex toy for the first half of our marriage. He's older now and more mature and we've got a different arrangement since he works (his choice) - but at the end of the day, he would be the first to tell you that I am in charge. Everyone sees us as a normal couple though.

Akasha




Sexyladydee -> RE: Ownining a vanilla guy (5/8/2014 5:50:57 PM)

My vanilla relationships were always FLR. But like Aakasha I would get those urges and had to use other outlets to get ride of those aggressive needs. In all of my relationships we only had difficulties when outsiders voiced an opinion. I made more money, I was better educated, owned a car and my own home. Growing up in a home where my mother held the same position but married blue collar men, including my Father, I never had a problem with a man being financially unequal. Later I began to accept my "kinky" side and developed an understanding of the D/s dynamic in all of my relationships.

So yes, it's very possible and depending on the people involved you can work out your own dynamic.




I'm not selfish, just stubborn and usually right. LadyDee




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
7.910156E-02