quote:

if two people are compatible and open-minded and communicate well (There's that word *communicate* again!)that the relationship can be more intimate, closer, and more fulfilling than a vanilla relationship in many cases.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SusanofO

I am wondering this because I've read many times on this board how some people think a bdsm relationship is more "honest" than others they've had. I can see where this might be true, because "roles" might be more concretely defined, and "expectations" are maybe clearly stated in advance, etc. - and this certainly isn't the case in many "vanilla" relationships, I imagine (although then again - maybe it is, I don't know).

I also seem to read many posts where someone has really almost destroyed someone else with their misbehavior within a bdsm relationship, and one person (or both), have been so completely emotionally vulnerable within it, that this has left them seemingly devastated (maybe because it is a bdsm relationship, where emotions can be laid more "bare" than in some others - least I think that potential is certainly there for that to happen, than in some "vanilla" relationships).

So - I am left thinking that  - simply because a bdsm relationship might contain more clearly defined roles, or more clearly stated expectations than a vanilla relationship, that if you're in one with someone who has "issues",  or perhaps is simply not seeking what another person might be looking for, that a relationship is not necessarily any more ill-fated, or likewise, suited for happiness, than any non-bdsm relationship.

Any thoughts?
Are bdsm relationships "healthier" simply because they might have the capacity to be more "honest", or does this matter if the people involved simply aren't "on the same page"?    

Thanks for the replies. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: SusanofO

I am wondering this because I've read many times on this board how some people think a bdsm relationship is more "honest" than others they've had. I can see where this might be true, because "roles" might be more concretely defined, and "expectations" are maybe clearly stated in advance, etc. - and this certainly isn't the case in many "vanilla" relationships, I imagine (although then again - maybe it is, I don't know).

quote:

ORIGINAL: RavenMuse

For two folks who are vanilla, a vanilla relationship will be healthier than any D/s or BDSM relationship they attempt.

For a Dominant and a sub/slave, a D/s relationship will be healthier than trying to deny their nature and fit into some ill-chosen vanilla straightjacket.

Horses for courses. If you are somewhere you 'fit' then it is healthy, if you are trying to be something you are not, then it isn't. You can't say one is across the board 'healthier' because it depends in the people in it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SusanofO

So - I am left thinking that  - simply because a bdsm relationship might contain more clearly defined roles, or more clearly stated expectations than a vanilla relationship, that if you're in one with someone who has "issues",  or perhaps is simply not seeking what another person might be looking for, that a relationship is not necessarily any more ill-fated, or likewise, suited for happiness, than any non-bdsm relationship.

Any thoughts?
Are bdsm relationships "healthier" simply because they might have the capacity to be more "honest", or does this matter if the people involved simply aren't "on the same page"?