D/s vs vanilla (Full Version)

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



Message

Essnem -> D/s vs vanilla (6/27/2015 4:29:18 AM)

In a dominance/submission relationship, would you have the same values as if it were vanilla?



MsLadySue -> RE: D/s vs vanilla (6/27/2015 6:05:40 AM)

The same values should apply. Adding some kink should not change the basis of the vanilla relationship. Trust, respect, love, etc. should still be there.

I'm actually surprised you would ask this question since you've stated you have "almost 15 years experience", IMO this seems like a newbie question.



Essnem -> RE: D/s vs vanilla (6/27/2015 6:24:55 AM)

Thank you for your thoughts Ms Lady Sue. I'm wanting to hear others opinions.



ApertureLash -> RE: D/s vs vanilla (6/27/2015 6:31:00 AM)

Most vanilla relationships have a D/s element to them - one person is often a bit more assertive than the other. You can't assume a "vanilla" relationship is actually significantly different to a "D/s" relationship. The real difference, from a power persepective, may be no more than terminology and what the people in those relationships find comfortable.

We like to label things nice and clean, this label is clearly for this, this label is clearly for that, but the truth is it's a big ball of fur and nothing's clear at all except our own perception of what a label means.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MsLadySue

I'm actually surprised you would ask this question since you've stated you have "almost 15 years experience", IMO this seems like a newbie question.


The reasons for asking a question aren't always obvious. If I asked something like this, it would simply because I was looking for an opinion that opened my mind to a new perspective, not because I didn't have clear ideas that make perfect sense filling my head. Essentially, I'd be looking for the surprising.

No idea what the OP's reasons for asking are, and not suggesting they're in any way like me, just pointing out that a newbie question isn't always a newbie question. Sometimes there's a hidden agenda. Sometimes.



Essnem -> RE: D/s vs vanilla (6/27/2015 6:36:17 AM)

I appreciate your view ApertureLash. I find it interesting to gauge another's perspective because it contributes to my understanding, sometimes gives me newfound knowledge. Sometimes, I also glean a bit of wisdom.



Lucylastic -> RE: D/s vs vanilla (6/27/2015 7:26:27 AM)

my values are the same wether im in a d/s relationship or a nilla one...
so Im gonna say
Most D/s relationships have a vanilla element to them



MariaB -> RE: D/s vs vanilla (6/27/2015 7:39:06 AM)

Although vanilla relationships tend to have an assertive one and a less assertive one, I wouldn't compare it to D/s; the reason being is, the less assertive often feels down trodden and the assertive one often bemoan that they have to make too many of the decisions. There is no D/s agreement and therefore its not so black and white and there is often resentment.

I don't think D/s has to be kink either but it does have to be an agreement/consensual. There are many D/s type relationships where old fashioned values have been put in place. She doesn't have to call her partner Master/Sir or anything other than his given name; he doesn't have to be demanding or behave dominantly, he merely needs to lead from the front. Its just another form of lifestyle deliberately chosen by two people.



CynthiaWVirginia -> RE: D/s vs vanilla (6/27/2015 7:39:21 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Essnem

In a dominance/submission relationship, would you have the same values as if it were vanilla?


I am still me, no matter what type of relationship I'm in.

If in the end I can't look back on my life with...a peaceful feeling and some pride, knowing that I stuck to my moral values, what would it matter if I had lived my life vanilla or kinky?



ResidentSadist -> RE: D/s vs vanilla (6/27/2015 12:35:19 PM)

Not everyone is an advocate of The Loving Dominant book by fellow forum member John Warren. Great book, but it is mostly about one perspective of D/s. In that case, the answer is probably yes. Although both yes and no answers are proper answers. So your question seems vague to me. You need to clear up what values you speak of?

NO - - Core values in some D/s are possession, obedience and humiliation... you do what you are told even with strangers you don't trust. Obedience is a priority to prove possession and that felling of possession is the core of the bond. All the other normal relationship stuff doesn't count so much.

NO - - Some relationships are based on objectification. Treat them like an animal, pet, toy, inhuman caged ... whatever. Love and respect have nothing to do with it. The person just wants to lose their humanity... including the human set of emotions normally associated with relationships. For example, the D-type doesn't feed the s-type because he cares for her. He feeds her because his pet will die if he doesn't and then he will have no one to play with until he finds a new one.

YES - - Many D/s relationships are romance based and in that, they have many commonalities with vanilla core values. They just operate in a different framework of rule and protocols.




DesFIP -> RE: D/s vs vanilla (6/27/2015 1:23:50 PM)

Yes I do. We still value love, honor, respect, consent. We're compatible politically.

If I didn't like him, which means thinking he's a good person who is moral and ethical, I couldn't submit to him. I couldn't trust him.



RockaRolla -> RE: D/s vs vanilla (6/27/2015 3:14:52 PM)

There's no reason to compromise your values in a D/s relationship. If anything, with some aspects it can be all the more important to have them.

I need to trust and care for my partners on some level. That doesn't go away with the introduction of D/s. It's doubly important then that I trust the person dominating me, or that my sub is cared for and feels safe.



DerangedUnit -> RE: D/s vs vanilla (6/27/2015 10:35:30 PM)

I'll say nope. If I was to date someone id hold them to a lot higher standards, id want them to be as similar to me as possible, practically a clone. It has to do with how I see relationships. When you date someone vanilla there is the thought that eventually it is supposed to lead to marriage and kids, becoming one with that person both legally and physically... I don't imagine myself ever liking anyone else enough to give myself up. so im selfish, I don't.

I don't see ownership as a relationship so much as a business transaction, it will not lead anywhere. I am me and they are them and we can be complete opposites, have none of the same interests as long as a simple guideline for what we are doing is followed. Likely I just have commitment issues haha



sexyred1 -> RE: D/s vs vanilla (6/27/2015 10:45:34 PM)

Of course you should have the same values.

Otherwise you are being hypocritical, manipulative or dishonest.



ResidentSadist -> RE: D/s vs vanilla (6/28/2015 1:28:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sexyred1

Of course you should have the same values.

Otherwise you are being hypocritical, manipulative or dishonest.

But red . . . if you don't do vanilla, how can you be hypocritical?

I don't have nilla' relationships and haven't had one since my teens.



Kaliko -> RE: D/s vs vanilla (6/28/2015 5:57:09 AM)

I'm really having trouble answering this question. My gut reaction is that my values don't affect my relationships; that's it's more about our compatible personalities and how easily we handle any different value systems we have. For example, I was dating an avid hunter when I was a struggling vegan. It wasn't a problem. However, his strict religious beliefs versus my more laid back notion of spirituality did cause conflict. It's not a checklist of values that I would or wouldn't give up for a relationship; it's how we handle our differences together which comes down to simple compatibility. I don't need matchy-matchy all the way down the line. In fact, some great conversations are the result of different values.

And so, yes, how we handle our different values in a D/s relationship is different than how they've been handled in vanilla relationships (for me, anyway). Obedience, ownership, behavior modification, etc...Tinkering with my behavior and responses is bound to lead to maybe not changes in my intrinsic values, but how much importance I place on those values and how much attention I give them. I devote as much energy to them as he tells me to. That obedience wouldn't exist in my former vanilla relationships.

Maybe being able to handle different values with compatibility is, itself, a value that I wouldn't want to give up. I suppose I could look at it that way.



moonbeast -> RE: D/s vs vanilla (6/29/2015 8:29:44 AM)

Hi, Kaliko,

I would phrase it right the other way round: Relationships don't affect my values.

But in the end we would come to the same conclusion. It is the way we handle differences -be it a different opinion, interest or value- that defines the relationship. If we can't adapt or cope with it, we break up. But I would not change what I value highly in a relationship. Nevertheless it may develop or change over time and with experience.

And here I see a difference in vanilla and D/s relationships. I know it's a cliché, but many people in vanilla relationships do not talk about the mechanisms, sometimes they even do not see them. On the other hand in those working D/s relationships (i.e. 2 years+) I know (and had) both sides are are clear about their needs and expectations.

So my answer to the OP is: No, my values are the same. But I value different things in a D/s relationship than in a vanilla one. And there I agree with ResidentSadist, those values might be quite different.




littleladybug -> RE: D/s vs vanilla (6/29/2015 8:53:18 AM)

No, my values don't change depending on type of relationship I am in.

In my little corner of the world, I don't make a distinction between "D/s" and "vanilla". What I mean by that is that when I forge my relationships, the values that I hold dear and look for in a partner could just as easily be found in the most "vanilla" of relationships or the most high-protocol D/s relationships. Loyalty, integrity and a general desire to live life to the fullest are my "top three".


quote:

ORIGINAL: moonbeast

I know it's a cliché, but many people in vanilla relationships do not talk about the mechanisms, sometimes they even do not see them. On the other hand in those working D/s relationships (i.e. 2 years+) I know (and had) both sides are are clear about their needs and expectations.



I wouldn't say that people in "working D/s relationships" have the market cornered on being clear about needs and expectations. Not from what I've seen at least.



disgaldrar -> RE: D/s vs vanilla (6/29/2015 9:03:58 AM)

All of my D/S relationships have been workable vanilla relationships as well (all through from when I was the dominant, then submissive and slave in the relationships that followed the first). I looked for the same compatibility in a Master, as I would in someone who I intended to have a completely kink-free relationship with. Not that I would. As much as I enjoy BDSM, I highly doubt that I'd be able to have a relationship without a vanilla romance or vanilla side to it as well, and vice versa; an entirely vanilla relationship would equally eventually drive me away.



shiftyw -> RE: D/s vs vanilla (6/29/2015 11:22:59 AM)

In short. Yes. If I were in a D/s relationship.



arnoud -> RE: D/s vs vanilla (6/29/2015 1:20:49 PM)

All relationships carry forward the same values.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875