Is there really a difference between BDSM and Vanilla?

Is there really a difference between BDSM and Vanilla? (Full Version)

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

Message

MasterVenom13 -> Is there really a difference between BDSM and Vanilla? (11/28/2014 12:24:47 PM)
Would you say that a D/s relationship and a Vanilla relationship are ultimately no different from each other? I mean when you break them down a few details may be different but the core values of both relationships types are the same like trust and respect. I ask because I know some people say a Vanilla relationship is different from a BDSM relationship but I've never really seen the difference.

Hyouki -> RE: Is there really a difference between BDSM and Vanilla? (11/28/2014 12:47:40 PM)
The difference between the two are subtle when broken down to the core. Though in a BDSM I think (and this is of course my own opinion) that more trust is required also a deeper connection, than in a Vanilla relationship. I say this because... The sub is trusting the Dom to know how far to take things and trusting them to know when to stop. But really a relationship is built up slowly and has ups and downs, pros and cons no matter the detailing. So in that respect BDSM and Vanilla relationships are no different. Most when referring to the differences are commenting on the detailing on the different dynamics between the two BDSM has spankings punishments rules etc Vanilla does not really have 1 partner commanding the other not in the same context or way BDSM relationships do, if at all.

freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Is there really a difference between BDSM and Vanilla? (11/28/2014 1:15:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hyouki Vanilla does not really have 1 partner commanding the other not in the same context or way BDSM relationships do, if at all. I disagree with this. There are traditional 50's or Victorian style households where (more usually) the male completely dominates the female. This could be a D/s or M/s relationship but that doesn't necessarily mean that there are any BD or SM aspects of BDSM actually taking place but the dynamic is still very much present and strictly adhered to. What I am alluding to is that D/s and M/s is considered (loosely) to be a part of BDSM as opposed to strictly 'vanilla' but none of the more extreme practices are done within the dynamic.

ExiledTyrant -> RE: Is there really a difference between BDSM and Vanilla? (11/28/2014 1:31:48 PM)
Don't antagonize that one, freedomdwarf. The Youma are EVIL unless in the service of a Kirin, and I do not recall dispatching a Kirin to bind that particular Youma. Jus sayin Tentei

DesFIP -> RE: Is there really a difference between BDSM and Vanilla? (11/28/2014 1:37:39 PM)
The same skill sets are required for both. You must have mutual respect and liking. You must be capable of clear and effective communication. You must be able to accept criticism. You must fight fair. You must be focused not on winning over the other, but on keeping the relationship strong and healthy. Relationship skills are relationship skills. They don't change. And lots of us don't have a punishment dynamic nor tons of rules. We don't. What we have is the knowledge that he's a better decision maker than I am so the smart thing is for him to have the authority to make those decisions. We have love and respect for each other and a desire to make each other happy. So we problem solve instead of fighting. Punishment teaches you fear, it doesn't teach skill. Figure out what skill the other person needs to accomplish a task and there's no reason for punishment. And that includes accepting the fact that sometimes the task you want accomplished is a bad one which will lose you respect and trust and shouldn't be given.

freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Is there really a difference between BDSM and Vanilla? (11/28/2014 1:51:08 PM)
^^^^^ What she said ^^^^^ [sm=goodpost.gif]

InHisHeart -> RE: Is there really a difference between BDSM and Vanilla? (11/28/2014 1:55:23 PM)
We're a D/s-BDSM couple. To us, D/s is the every day, emotional side of our relationship. BDSM is the physical part of our relationship. No one is going to see us as a BDSM couple because it's done privately behind closed doors. He would never discipline me when around others, he would wait until we're home. If I do or say something he doesn't approve of when we're out, the most he would do is give me "the look" that others wouldn't think anything of but I know what it means. The D/s part of our relationship is constant, it's every minute of every day, whether we're together or apart. It's not something most would pick up on when seeing us out for dinner, at the park, in the mall or at a family get-together. I know his rules, I know what protocol he wants me to follow whether we're at home or out and I follow them. When all is said and done, every relationship whether D/s or vanilla is individual to the people involved, they're all different.

wittynamehere -> RE: Is there really a difference between BDSM and Vanilla? (11/28/2014 2:05:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterVenom13 Would you say that a D/s relationship and a Vanilla relationship are ultimately no different from each other? I mean when you break them down a few details may be different but the core values of both relationships types are the same like trust and respect. Just because 2 things have similarities doesn't mean they have no differences. A better understanding of logic and reason would help you out. Also, grab a dictionary and use it.

NookieNotes -> RE: Is there really a difference between BDSM and Vanilla? (11/28/2014 2:26:52 PM)
What kind of difference are you looking for? There are differences, of course. That is why there are different terms. Hell there are differences in different types of D/s or BDSM relationships. FemDom versus male-led Master/slave or Daddy/little. Are you asking if one is inherently better than the other? I think the answer to that is no. Are they are equal? Yes. Are they are the same? I'd say no. In what areas are you hoping to compare? You mentioned trust. While in most D/s relationships, trust is expected to take the forefront and priority, and be worked on and built, in many vanilla relationships, it is expected to just exist, and be an integral and often natural part of the structure. Can vanilla relationships built trust? Yes. Can they make it a priority? Yes. They do not as often as D/s. That makes them different. Or areas of consent. Very rarely is consent as critical an issue in vanilla relationships as in D/s. As carefully discussed and negotiated. Again, it CAN be. But isn't, usually. A difference. But, it can be like comparing a Great Dane to a Chihuahua. They are the same in many aspects: 99.9% of DNA, four legs, two eyes, tongues that lick, tails that wag, barks for communication, and more), and yet, they are NOT THE SAME. That's my take, anyway.

Gauge -> RE: Is there really a difference between BDSM and Vanilla? (11/28/2014 10:50:37 PM)
The difference between vanilla relationships and BDSM relationships is one has vowels.

FieryOpal -> RE: Is there really a difference between BDSM and Vanilla? (11/28/2014 11:22:27 PM)
You're going to get as many different answers and opinions to what you're asking as there is a spectrum to the word "relationship" in itself. From friendship, casual relations, to committed relationships, LTRs, marriage, etc. There is a world of difference between vanilla interpersonal relationships and D/s-BDSM relationships, and yet there are the same principles which apply to both kinds. There are sexual and non-sexual vanilla relationships, where there can still be intimacy. There is sexual and non-sexual D/s or M/s, where there can still be intimacy. There is sexual and non-sexual BDSM, where there can still be intimacy. Any of these can operate as a partnership, or not. There is a difference between being BDSM play partners and being collared/owned in a D/s-M/s. Yet both require mutual consensuality and (deepening) levels of trust. Not the same commitment level, in most cases. Some would contend that D/s-M/s dynamics require deeper or greater trust between partners. Vanilla consensuality is more implicit than explicit, for the most part. There is no clear-cut understanding of withdrawal of consent (or safewording). Commitment levels here vary widely as well. If you could be more specific, this would be helpful in understanding what you're getting at. How can you NOT see the differences and the similarities between vanilla and non-vanilla interactions?

DesFIP -> RE: Is there really a difference between BDSM and Vanilla? (11/29/2014 7:17:00 AM)
Btw, it takes a lot more trust to have a child with a man, believing that he'll be there for the next twenty years then it does to have him swing a flogger at you for half an hour. Lots of smart women will play casually with people they barely know. They don't breed with them.

NookieNotes -> RE: Is there really a difference between BDSM and Vanilla? (11/29/2014 8:11:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesFIP Btw, it takes a lot more trust to have a child with a man, believing that he'll be there for the next twenty years then it does to have him swing a flogger at you for half an hour. Lots of smart women will play casually with people they barely know. They don't breed with them. I would not personally classify a scene as a relationship.

Bhruic -> RE: Is there really a difference between BDSM and Vanilla? (11/29/2014 10:58:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterVenom13 Would you say that a D/s relationship and a Vanilla relationship are ultimately no different from each other? I mean when you break them down a few details may be different but the core values of both relationships types are the same like trust and respect. I ask because I know some people say a Vanilla relationship is different from a BDSM relationship but I've never really seen the difference. The core values of trust and respect, are essentially the same for all relationships... from your lover, to your Maytag repair man. We don't need labels to describe similarities, only differences.

FieryOpal -> RE: Is there really a difference between BDSM and Vanilla? (11/29/2014 12:53:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NookieNotes quote: ORIGINAL: DesFIP Btw, it takes a lot more trust to have a child with a man, believing that he'll be there for the next twenty years then it does to have him swing a flogger at you for half an hour. Lots of smart women will play casually with people they barely know. They don't breed with them. I would not personally classify a scene as a relationship. Ordinarily, no. But OP is only 23, and I've noticed that young(er) people have a divergent concept between intimate "relationship" and what many of us older folk do (no offense). In fact, I asked him to clarify his Opening Post because for him to say that he's "never really seen the difference" between a "Vanilla relationship" and a "BDSM relationship" caused me pause. His opening query starts off with the underlying premise that "a D/s relationship and a Vanilla relationship are ultimately no different from each other." A friendship is a relationship. This could included casual scening play. Having a fuckbuddy and/or play partner is a relationship of sorts, although it is more akin to a sexual arrangement in my estimation. As is having an affair with a married person or frequenting the same BDSM provider as a paying client. I have even heard a man refer to his live-in girlfriend, with whom he was in an open relationship as an FWB. [8\|] He had never been married, his longest LTRs over the decades were from 2-5 years (which he tried to argue was the equivalent duration of a modern-day marriage [8\|] ), so he didn't feel he had any relationship commitment issues. Then he tried to argue that being friends was the basis of any relationship (true), but in his view, being friends went hand-in-hand with being fair game sexually. He did not recognize that being in a woman's Friend Zone ruled out sexual relations. Nor that there was anything wrong with having a one-night stand with the barely legal daughter of his girlfriend's BFF, since he evidently thought he was God's Gift to Women. I will go so far as to say that I consider this type of man dangerous, because he has no boundaries (other than the hotness factor) when it comes to sexuality (pooh-poohing any hint of sexual morality or propriety), as do those men who commit date-rape (warped sense of self-entitlement, no respect for another person's boundaries and limits, that one's own body is not one's personal property, no regard for consent along vanilla-like blurred lines of thinking). Any and all females are fair game in his mind. (I'm not saying that OP is like this; I'm just giving an example of how differences in perspectives can color one's views.) [Edited for typo]

NookieNotes -> RE: Is there really a difference between BDSM and Vanilla? (11/29/2014 12:59:08 PM)
I get your point. Maybe I should have said Relationship with "a capital R." smiles I mean, I'm assuming he did not mean our BDSM relationship with the barely legal teen next door, or our plumber, although those are relationships, however far removed. LOL @ "modern-day marriage"!

Greta75 -> RE: Is there really a difference between BDSM and Vanilla? (11/30/2014 2:47:11 AM)
For me I feel different. I feel like I would never be as deeply connected with someone I have a vanilla relationship with, as with someone I have a D/S relationship with. I'm trying to figure out exactly why. But I haven't figured that out yet. There is something deep inside of me that a dominant would have touched that a vanilla man couldn't touch and move me in the same way. I can trust a vanilla man 101%, he can be aware of all my kinks, but he would not possess my soul, it just wouldn't feel as deep and soul searing. It would feel like a surface relationship basically and practical. But end of the day, my measure of love isn't based on how align he is to my kinks, but where is he when I needed him most. If it's the vanilla guy who is the most reliable one. Then his what I'm gonna be with. But there will always be something deeply missing. I will not feel whole. I still say the level of trust required in bdsm is higher than of a vanilla relationship. In a vanilla relationship, you can really be in it and still keep a pretty high level of mistrust and be married for a long time. I see it all the time around me. What vanilla couples keep from each other. And yet still function together. But in a bdsm relationship, there is a certain high level of trust required for it to survive long term. I have less to fear with a vanilla man. I give less of myself to him. It's so different.

freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Is there really a difference between BDSM and Vanilla? (11/30/2014 4:48:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 For me I feel different. I feel like I would never be as deeply connected with someone I have a vanilla relationship with, as with someone I have a D/S relationship with. I'm trying to figure out exactly why. But I haven't figured that out yet. There is something deep inside of me that a dominant would have touched that a vanilla man couldn't touch and move me in the same way. I can trust a vanilla man 101%, he can be aware of all my kinks, but he would not possess my soul, it just wouldn't feel as deep and soul searing. It would feel like a surface relationship basically and practical. But end of the day, my measure of love isn't based on how align he is to my kinks, but where is he when I needed him most. If it's the vanilla guy who is the most reliable one. Then his what I'm gonna be with. But there will always be something deeply missing. I will not feel whole. I still say the level of trust required in bdsm is higher than of a vanilla relationship. In a vanilla relationship, you can really be in it and still keep a pretty high level of mistrust and be married for a long time. I see it all the time around me. What vanilla couples keep from each other. And yet still function together. But in a bdsm relationship, there is a certain high level of trust required for it to survive long term. I have less to fear with a vanilla man. I give less of myself to him. It's so different. To a degree I can understand where you're coming from. But I really have to take issue with your last bit: "What vanilla couples keep from each other". I never have, and never will, keep anything from my partner and I expect the same in return. Keeping things from your partner invites mistrust and that never bodes well in any relationship. So in that sense, there is no difference between my D/s relationship than the vanilla side. There is an absolute and total trust between my partner and I.

Greta75 -> RE: Is there really a difference between BDSM and Vanilla? (11/30/2014 4:54:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 I never have, and never will, keep anything from my partner and I expect the same in return. Keeping things from your partner invites mistrust and that never bodes well in any relationship. So in that sense, there is no difference between my D/s relationship than the vanilla side. There is an absolute and total trust between my partner and I. Yes, but my point is, vanilla couples can keep alot of themselves away from each other and still have long term 20 to 30 yr marriages. Vanilla relationships seriously sometimes can function long term on surface depth for alot of people. But try that in D/S it wouldn't last.

freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Is there really a difference between BDSM and Vanilla? (11/30/2014 5:08:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 I never have, and never will, keep anything from my partner and I expect the same in return. Keeping things from your partner invites mistrust and that never bodes well in any relationship. So in that sense, there is no difference between my D/s relationship than the vanilla side. There is an absolute and total trust between my partner and I. Yes, but my point is, vanilla couples can keep alot of themselves away from each other and still have long term 20 to 30 yr marriages. Vanilla relationships seriously sometimes can function long term on surface depth for alot of people. But try that in D/S it wouldn't last. That doesn't happen a great deal - not over here at least. Many many shallow relationships, 'nilla or otherwise won't, and generally don't, last into decades. That's why the divorce rate is rapidly rising in the west; disillusionment and mistrust is common. Maybe over there they take the marriage vows more seriously and stay together even if they really don't want to be. Maybe that would explain it; the difference in cultures. But here in the west, divorce is that much easier than it used to be so couples are now able to get 'unhitched' almost as easily as they can get married.

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625