What Would You consider " Vanilla" To Be

[John Doe]

Vanilla is missionary with the lights off.

French vanilla is the same thing but with tongue.

 

[Ebonyfire]

I have learned..

Never to talk about sex or relationships while naked and/or in bed.

Never to talk try to get a man to spill his guts in bed and/or naked.

And last but not least, never, ever use the information to gain an advantage and/or revenge.

Even if the relationship goes belly up, I never threaten to use it to hurt the person. I just do a "core dump" and forget their secrets.

In this way, I can walk away with integrity intact, and an ex-relationship never comes back to haunt me.

I would never use the information I have gained as leverage for revenge.

EB

 

[Ebonyfire]

Basically the key to get a man (there are exceptions) to open up is to shut the fuck up and listen, really listen and look at him and his body language.

 

[shy slave]

Thank you Eb.

I agree with the lessons learnt. I rarely fall out with any of my ex's, nor have I ever used private information about them against them. I don't see the point.

I admit that I love men, I always have. I like everything about them but for many years I had a low opinion of men and looking back that must have affected their ability to be themselves with me. I am not sure I always wanted to see 'them.'
Perhaps I only wanted to see what I thought they were, not what they were.

Finding BDSM has developed many of my thoughts and perceptions on sexuality. Finding out that the D/s dynamic exists has enabled me to be myself and find the right person for me, instead of trying to make someone become the right person (even though I did not necessarily realise at the time I was doing that).

I hope that makes sense.

 

[JMohegan]

I like EG example of it being the kind of sex you can imagine your parents having, but then again who knows what people do in private.

I'm 48. Easily old enough to be the parent of many on this board.

I've been doing D/s and BDSM for pretty much my entire adult life. I exerted control in relationships and engaged in pain play long before I learned the terminology and customs of what is referred to as D/s and BDSM today.

I "invented" a safeword system, and the concept of limits, and the concept of overt obedience as well. Not only was I doing this stuff myself; I was teaching other guys how to do it too. Actually, it's more correct to say that we were teaching each other.

To me, power play and pain play seem like such natural parts of human sexuality that I find it hard to believe that any generation in any society anywhere on this planet hasn't had its share of people doing stuff that we now would refer to as D/s or BDSM.

 

[shy slave]

I'm 48. Easily old enough to be the parent of many on this board.

I've been doing D/s and BDSM for pretty much my entire adult life. I exerted control in relationships and engaged in pain play long before I learned the terminology and customs of what is referred to as D/s and BDSM today.

I "invented" a safeword system, and the concept of limits, and the concept of overt obedience as well. Not only was I doing this stuff myself; I was teaching other guys how to do it too. Actually, it's more correct to say that we were teaching each other.

To me, power play and pain play seem like such natural parts of human sexuality that I find it hard to believe that any generation in any society anywhere on this planet hasn't had its share of people doing stuff that we now would refer to as D/s or BDSM.

I agree with your last paragraph JM. Even in the Bible they had Sodom and Gomorrah.

 

[submissiveknight]

The whole reason that I brought up this thread is because I heard something on a local radio show last Saturday night. It's a show where a local retailer of a sex boutique brings in her toys and discusses them on the air.

While listening she claimed that she gave a present to a good freind of hers which was basically a ring toss game. She claimed that her herself really didn't see any thrill of having a dildo inplanted in someone's ass while other people sat around and tossed rings at it.

Now the friend that she gave the present to was estactic and thought it was one of the greatest gifts that she had ever received!

She has four stores in town and one of them has a dungeon room where it's almost entirely catered to bdsm products! So I wouldn't think by any means that she was vanilla. In fact she has a very kinky mind.

Don't know why the term vanilla popped into my head, but it got me to thinking if just the term intercourse (with all kinks aside) was used how would people define the term vanilla!

Since I'm not real big on labaling and I have seen it referenced so many times in our threads it's always been hard for me to get a picture of what vanilla really is?

in my experiences, even the most simple, no toys, no props, sexual experence between me and Sir is still looked at in my eyes through a lense of D/s since that is how our relationship is structured.

in order to consider something you are doing "vanilla", IMO, it has to detach from the D/s or sadomasochism or BDSM, etc etc.

She hit it write on the point I feel. If you are in a D/s relationship it is in the mindset that you are in. No matter what you are doing (that is in our case as submissives) from the point we wake up in the morning to the time we fall asleep we are in servitude to our Master/Mistress!

So actually whether it be intercourse or not. To define "vanilla" could be a mindset that is anything out of the realm of D/s! Not actually pertaining to the actual view of what people are involved in or how they conduct there lives, but rather the way our minds view others detached from D/s!

Yes/No ?

 

[MasterPhoenix]

Just like former Supreme Court Justice Potter Goss said of pornography, "I can't describe it, but I know it when I see it."

 

[submissiveknight]

Just like former Supreme Court Justice Potter Goss said of pornography, "I can't describe it, but I know it when I see it."

Like Ebony Fire said;

Unless you have a peep hole into other people's bedrooms and/or homes, one thing is for certain; what people SAY they do and what they ACTUALLY do is often very different.

People just censor themselves for acceptance.

Eb

Can't always believe what you think you see!

 

[Netzach]

To me, vanilla is about egalitarian attitudes, sex in which reciprocation and tit-for-tat can be expected, and compromise is the main tool for problem-solving. Activites can sometimes get a little out - there - my ex and I would play with food, light spanking, moderate roleplays at times, but that fundamental egalitarian default isn't where I'm at. Great in politics, maybe, nice ideal, but not hot-making.

 

[submissiveknight]

To me, vanilla is about egalitarian attitudes, sex in which reciprocation and tit-for-tat can be expected, and compromise is the main tool for problem-solving. Activites can sometimes get a little out - there - my ex and I would play with food, light spanking, moderate roleplays at times, but that fundamental egalitarian default isn't where I'm at. Great in politics, maybe, nice ideal, but not hot-making.

Thats good I like that one, especially "compromise is the main tool for problem-solving." Defiantly out of the realm of D/s mindset.

 

[Ebonyfire]

I hope that makes sense.

I forgot to reply. It makes perfect sense to me!

Eb

 

[Blushing Bottom]

What would you consider "vanilla" to be?

boring

d

 

[LadyAria]

Vanilla to me has always just meant common, ordinary, and unimaginative.

 

[neonflux]

To me, power play and pain play seem like such natural parts of human sexuality that I find it hard to believe that any generation in any society anywhere on this planet hasn't had its share of people doing stuff that we now would refer to as D/s or BDSM.

JMohegan, I have to agree that power play is an integral part of all human sexuality - there is in every sexual encounter an element of control and surrender. I also believe that many of us are drawn to the erotic nature of pain, although I do think that there are people for whom this experience has absolutely no attraction. (Perhaps only because I'm still giving my primary the "benefit of the doubt," LOL - I did get him to use a wartenberg wheel on the soles of my feet last night when he was massaging them and he became very fascinated by the device, but stepped back when I winced).

I would define vanilla as any relationship in which the D/s elements remain unspoken and so non-consensual. I would include within this definition relationships which incorporate light pain - spanking, nipple clips, etc. - as mine with my ex did. However, she would have never acknowledged the D/s elements of the relationship and so even in retrospect, I would not call it kinky.

To me, vanilla is about egalitarian attitudes, sex in which reciprocation and tit-for-tat can be expected, and compromise is the main tool for problem-solving. Activites can sometimes get a little out - there - my ex and I would play with food, light spanking, moderate roleplays at times, but that fundamental egalitarian default isn't where I'm at. Great in politics, maybe, nice ideal, but not hot-making.

A mentor of mine is more likely to speak of control and surrender, which are terms I am being drawn to, also, these days. Netzach, I am not sure that one ever finds true egalitarianism in vanilla relationships - as J suggests, I have never been in a "vanilla" relationship that didn't include power play on almost every level, not only sexual. Because the play so often turned into struggle that was often carried out on an unspoken level, this didn't allow for true reciprocity. Wouldn't the term egalitarian or at least "equally reciprocal" be more descriptive of openly D/s relationships where there is consensual agreement about power arrangements to ensure that they are beneficial and enjoyable for both individuals?

Just my 2¢...

Neon

 

[submissiveknight]

boring

d

Of course I would have to agree that it certainly can be! Especially if you view vanilla to be common, ordinary, and unimaginative, as Lady Aira stated.

Then again I lived a large majority of my life as what alot of people may determine as vanilla and it was by no means common, ordinary, and unimaginative!

 

[submissiveknight]

JMohegan, I have to agree that power play is an integral part of all human sexuality - there is in every sexual encounter an element of control and surrender. I also believe that many of us are drawn to the erotic nature of pain, although I do think that there are people for whom this experience has absolutely no attraction. (Perhaps only because I'm still giving my primary the "benefit of the doubt," LOL - I did get him to use a wartenberg wheel on the soles of my feet last night when he was massaging them and he became very fascinated by the device, but stepped back when I winced).

I would define vanilla as any relationship in which the D/s elements remain unspoken and so non-consensual. I would include within this definition relationships which incorporate light pain - spanking, nipple clips, etc. - as mine with my ex did. However, she would have never acknowledged the D/s elements of the relationship and so even in retrospect, I would not call it kinky. A mentor of mine is more likely to speak of control and surrender, which are terms I am being drawn to, also, these days. Netzach, I am not sure that one ever finds true egalitarianism in vanilla relationships - as J suggests, I have never been in a "vanilla" relationship that didn't include power play on almost every level, not only sexual. Because the play so often turned into struggle that was often carried out on an unspoken level, this didn't allow for true reciprocity. Wouldn't the term egalitarian or at least "equally reciprocal" be more descriptive of openly D/s relationships where there is consensual agreement about power arrangements to ensure that they are beneficial and enjoyable for both individuals?

Just my 2¢...

Neon

IMO powerplay is just a part of human nature period!!! JMohegan is correct, but that can go to any standpoint hence, politics, bussiness, relationships, and sexuality.

Thats why I was trying to keep power play useing such things as, pain and nipple clamps out of the context. they are valid points, but D/s is so much more! So I wanted to try and get an idea on how people would define vanilla only at the standpoint of intercourse! It was to keep it simple, like Lady Aria used common, ordinary, and unimaginative!

So far catalina started to touch on it, but Netzach and myinnerslut have given the best examples I've seen yet, especially if you combine their points! Vanilla uses compromise as a main tool for problem-solving, which involves a mindset that is anything out of the realm of D/s.

 

[neonflux]

IMO powerplay is just a part of human nature period!!! JMohegan is correct, but that can go to any standpoint hence, politics, bussiness, relationships, and sexuality.

Thats why I was trying to keep power play useing such things as, pain and nipple clamps out of the context. they are valid points, but D/s is so much more! So I wanted to try and get an idea on how people would define vanilla only at the standpoint of intercourse! It was to keep it simple, like Lady Aria used common, ordinary, and unimaginative!

So far catalina started to touch on it, but Netzach and myinnerslut have given the best examples I've seen yet, especially if you combine their points! Vanilla uses compromise as a main tool for problem-solving, which involves a mindset that is anything out of the realm of D/s.

Regarding vanilla as it applies to intercourse/oral/penetration, perhaps my alternate view is due to the fact that I am switch and up to this point all of my kink sexual partners have been also, or the fact that I am bi.

When it comes to sex, whether I am taking control (e.g., masturbating over my partner or mounting him/her while insisiting that s/he not touch me) or surrendering (allowing a partner to cum on my face or to fuck it with a penis or strap-on), or engaged in a more egalitarian exchange (fucking each other side by side or performing 69), when doing these activities with a partner who is also "kinky," there is always that element of "mutual agreement."

This type of agreement and consciousness of the power exchange is what defines a non-vanilla exchange for me. And yes, this hyper-awareness of energy exchange makes D/s sex much hotter to me. It is a lack of this type of consciousness as to the power arrangements that I would define as vanilla.

Neon

 

[submissiveknight]

Regarding vanilla as it applies to intercourse/oral/penetration, perhaps my alternate view is due to the fact that I am switch and up to this point all of my kink sexual partners have been also, or the fact that I am bi.

When it comes to sex, whether I am taking control (e.g., masturbating over my partner or mounting him/her while insisiting that s/he not touch me) or surrendering (allowing a partner to cum on my face or to fuck it with a penis or strap-on), or engaged in a more egalitarian exchange (fucking each other side by side or performing 69), when doing these activities with a partner who is also "kinky," there is always that element of "mutual agreement."

This type of agreement and consciousness of the power exchange is what defines a non-vanilla exchange for me. And yes, this hyper-awareness of energy exchange makes D/s sex much hotter to me. It is a lack of this type of consciousness as to the power arrangements that I would define as vanilla.

Neon

So basically it's the consciousness (mind set) of the control factor and how it is used more or less defines non- vanilla! Mutual agreement(compromise) can be excluded from a definition of vanilla?

I definitely agree with the consciousness (mind set)! As I think about it(please correct me if I'm wrong) I would still contend to believe that the mutual agreement (compromise) would still be included in the definition. Kind of like, per example, do it this way and not that way cause I like it this way better, or that way hurts to much. Where the choice can be made between the two partners!

 

[neonflux]

So basically it's the consciousness (mind set) of the control factor and how it is used more or less defines non- vanilla! Mutual agreement(compromise) can be excluded from a definition of vanilla?

I definitely agree with the consciousness (mind set)! As I think about it(please correct me if I'm wrong) I would still contend to believe that the mutual agreement (compromise) would still be included in the definition. Kind of like, per example, do it this way and not that way cause I like it this way better, or that way hurts to much. Where the choice can be made between the two partners!

Yes, that is how I experience it

 

[submissiveknight]

Yes, that is how I experience it

Thanks so much for your input, It's been a big help!