Defining "Vanilla"

[where]

So, non-vanilla=old school (ha! Old Guard )?
Thanks for explaining...as for the confusion...I've been known to have that effect on women...

*flutters eyelashes* I think it was the pilates and voignier actually!

but yeah, you wanna watch porn of women just enduring sex for the man's pleasure? watch commercial vanilla porn.

I like BDSM because it gives me more of what I want, even as a maybepossiblesub.

 

[where]

Or just ignore the old ideal nurturing role.

Or combine a few aspects of each.

Whatever way it works for her.

it's hard though. I mean I was raised by what at the time was a fairly radical feminist and the socialisation STILL comes through. the home nurture can counteract the cultural hegemony but only so far. My mum has kinda accepted that I'm making cock rings and shit, but if she had any idea about what the collar I wear symbolised, I really think she might disown me.

 

[Stella_Omega]

it's hard though. I mean I was raised by what at the time was a fairly radical feminist and the socialisation STILL comes through. the home nurture can counteract the cultural hegemony but only so far. My mum has kinda accepted that I'm making cock rings and shit, but if she had any idea about what the collar I wear symbolised, I really think she might disown me.

Sure, it's hard... nothing isn't hard.

 

[where]

Sure, it's hard... nothing isn't hard.

are we talking insertable objects? I'm totally up for that. or into that. or that should be up and into me...

 

[ownedsubgal]

*flutters eyelashes* I think it was the pilates and voignier actually!

but yeah, you wanna watch porn of women just enduring sex for the man's pleasure? watch commercial vanilla porn.

we've had the porn discussion before...everything you hate about it is what makes it actually tolerable and interesting to me.

as for vanilla, again i define it as one's personality and/or sexuality fitting in with the "norms" or status quo of a particular society. you aren't vanilla by my standards. we all have to deal with social conflicts on some level...vanilla and freak alike. but a vanilla woman doesn't have to feel defective or ostracized because she wants the kind of man all her girl friends, Oprah and Dr. Phil would call abusive. she doesn't have to feel dysfunctional because the most comfortable and natural sex for her is what Cosmo mag defines as rape. that is what i envy.

 

[Saltwatertaffy]

i would draw a very clear and obvious distinction between the nilla life and the non-vanilla life... the extent to which you incorporate aspects of BDSM into your life will determine how vanilla you are, and many vanillas are probably doing it and feeling guilty or ashamed... i tried living in a vanilla marriage for 25 years, and there is a HUGE difference between that and being in a relationship where i can be who i really am. The OP's question was basically, what's the big deal, and are those who profess to not be vanilla elitists? I'd have to say, yes, those who define themselves as kinky (not a word i prefer, since i believe all sexual practices should be able to come out of the closet and be considered normal, since they involve human behavior) usually also see themselves as "better" than everyone else, because they consider themselves to be more open-minded.

Of course, that's not really true, because once you claim you're open-minded, yet you're mad at those you claim are not, you've shown your lack of open-mindedness, but we shall forgive them for the time being, since they are in the early stages of self-discovery, as many others have pointed out, and are proselytizing.

However, I'd say if you knew gays as I did prior to the time when being gay was relatively acceptable, and knew their deep emotional pain at having to hide who they were, you'd understand right away the difference between being able to express your sexuality openly (Fetlife, kink, BDSM, etc.) and having to hide it in the nilla world cause you're scaring the straights. Literally.

Fetlife might well be full of crowing, but it is true that the vanilla world is not ordinarily open to women discussing, openly, their nightly whippings, punishments, non-removable collars, being owned, tied up and fucked till you can't see straight... the list goes on. In the nilla world, these things are, by and large, unacceptable behavior, and in my opinion, if you're on Fetlife and you express an anti-vanilla attitude, you've probably been up against some prejudice on the part of someone who told you how weird you were at one point, or maybe even called the cops. So yes, there's a HUGE difference between being straight and vanilla and being kinky and more into something like Fetlife. And the difference has REAL consequences, and i will not willingly go back to being a vanilla ever again.

Now, am I "better" than someone else who is vanilla because of that?

I want them to find their happiness, but not at the expense of mine, or anyone else who expresses their sexual needs differently than "the norm," since the norm keeps changing over time, depending on who's in power and prevailing psychosocial opinions.

 

[where]

we've had the porn discussion before...everything you hate about it is what makes it actually tolerable and interesting to me.

as for vanilla, again i define it as one's personality and/or sexuality fitting in with the "norms" or status quo of a particular society. you aren't vanilla by my standards. we all have to deal with social conflicts on some level...vanilla and freak alike. but a vanilla woman doesn't have to feel defective or ostracized because she wants the kind of man all her girl friends, Oprah and Dr. Phil would call abusive. she doesn't have to feel dysfunctional because the most comfortable and natural sex for her is what Cosmo mag defines as rape. that is what i envy.

my point is that the supposed 'norms' of society are actually more complex than they would seem. I actually think that vanilla is now a bit of a misnomer. it may have been fit for purpose as a label 30 years ago, but now even what you could call mainstream sexuality is enormously variable. I'm not saying that heteronormative forms of relationships are being superseded by queer (as in fluid, not as a denigrating term for homosexuality) forms of sexuality, but, and again I think this shows the impact of queer theory on society, the lines and the labels are more blurred.

I do understand (well I think, not going to presume) why people may think you are a victim of abuse or are in an abusive relationship, but if Cosmo is defining your sexual experience as rape, then that is because they fail to understand that for rape to occur the victim has to be fucked against her (or his) consent. The fact that you consent to the sex you have, no matter how violent or how little you enjoy it, stops it being rape.

If we look at our lives through the lens of the dominant culture's norms and values, then everybody is deviant.

and the porn... well there is very little porn I like. that is me.

 

[DVS]

For me, vanilla is defined as the world I live in every day. A job in which I can't be kinky or even mention kinky things, a family which is not very sexual, and friends I've known for years and years who define sex as the missionary position without much else.

Growing up in a small town, sex wasn't much of a topic for discussion. I remember one time when someone put a condom on a school door knob and a lot of people thought it was a balloon. Now that's vanilla! The few who knew what it was kept that knowledge to themselves. We weren't suppose to know what those things were, at our age. So, in a way, vanilla can mean naive.

I know there are some who live the BDSM livestyle 24/7 and they are confronted by the vanilla world more than I am. I'm not confronted by it. I know when I need to be vanilla and when I can be kinky. I guess I'm sexually ambidextrous.

 

[where]

i would draw a very clear and obvious distinction between the nilla life and the non-vanilla life... the extent to which you incorporate aspects of BDSM into your life will determine how vanilla you are, and many vanillas are probably doing it and feeling guilty or ashamed... i tried living in a vanilla marriage for 25 years, and there is a HUGE difference between that and being in a relationship where i can be who i really am. The OP's question was basically, what's the big deal, and are those who profess to not be vanilla elitists? I'd have to say, yes, those who define themselves as kinky (not a word i prefer, since i believe all sexual practices should be able to come out of the closet and be considered normal, since they involve human behavior) usually also see themselves as "better" than everyone else, because they consider themselves to be more open-minded.

Of course, that's not really true, because once you claim you're open-minded, yet you're mad at those you claim are not, you've shown your lack of open-mindedness, but we shall forgive them for the time being, since they are in the early stages of self-discovery, as many others have pointed out, and are proselytizing.

However, I'd say if you knew gays as I did prior to the time when being gay was relatively acceptable, and knew their deep emotional pain at having to hide who they were, you'd understand right away the difference between being able to express your sexuality openly (Fetlife, kink, BDSM, etc.) and having to hide it in the nilla world cause you're scaring the straights. Literally.

Fetlife might well be full of crowing, but it is true that the vanilla world is not ordinarily open to women discussing, openly, their nightly whippings, punishments, non-removable collars, being owned, tied up and fucked till you can't see straight... the list goes on. In the nilla world, these things are, by and large, unacceptable behavior, and in my opinion, if you're on Fetlife and you express an anti-vanilla attitude, you've probably been up against some prejudice on the part of someone who told you how weird you were at one point, or maybe even called the cops. So yes, there's a HUGE difference between being straight and vanilla and being kinky and more into something like Fetlife. And the difference has REAL consequences, and i will not willingly go back to being a vanilla ever again.

Now, am I "better" than someone else who is vanilla because of that?

I want them to find their happiness, but not at the expense of mine, or anyone else who expresses their sexual needs differently than "the norm," since the norm keeps changing over time, depending on who's in power and prevailing psychosocial opinions.

I get your point, but in fairness I never discuss my nilla exploits and I don't know many people who do discuss their sex lives outside of close friends. In terms of discussions with close friends, as a crowd of schoolgate mums, we have discussed handcuff accidents, getting caught tied up by the kids, the cadburys creme egg incident (that was actually really gross and I wish I never knew about it!) and at least two partners who liked to get into drag. and despite wearing a padlocked neck collar, I get no reaction beyond 'oooh that's pretty!'

every single one of these women considered their sex lives to be 'normal'. Now it might be because I'm in the UK and we are a lot more open, or it might be that I have a freaky circle of friends who are deluded into thinking they are straight, I don't know, but reading a lot of the posts on fetlife, I think, yeah, really, that's just like X or Y or Z.

 

[bhndblueyes88]

My brother wished he was sexually ambidextrous when he broke his right arm

 

[DVS]

My brother wished he was sexually ambidextrous when he broke his right arm

No, that's bi-puller.

 

[where]

*groans*

 

[_Stardust]

This has made me interested enough to be temporarily drawn out of lurking, and throw in my somewhat garbled 2p…

Although I’m almost certainly wrong about this, it’s pretty difficult to call yourself vanilla without at least knowing something of BDSM / kinky stuff / *insert better term here*. So isn’t really just used to describe an absence of ‘the other’? I kind of see it as being used more to describe what an act wasn’t, so a vanilla relationship would be one that didn’t have BDSM-esque / kinky / * please somebody put some better words in my mouth * elements, at least, not that the people in the relationship either are aware of, or are able to put a name to.

Vanilla just strengthens the ‘them and us’ feelings that any group will have, and once you’re in a group, you’re not really going to find many people advocating leaving ‘Us’ and becoming ‘Them’, which could be why you get all the ‘never gonna be ‘nillas’…

*shrugs and returns to lurkdom*

 

[WriterDom]

Vanilla is an unfortunate choice of word. It sent the other people outside of this forum over the edge in the beginning. Thinking we were calling them bland or boring which I don't think ever was the intention.

It's not a word I use very often anymore.

 

[where]

I like vanilla. it has an aromatic lushness that I can't stop consuming.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I like vanilla. it has an aromatic lushness that I can't stop consuming.

I'm also partial to cardamom

 

[midwestyankee]

I'm also partial to cardamom

I need to find more recipes for cardamom. Bought a humongous jar of it for one recipe and haven't seen a need for it since. Suggestions?

 

[CutieMouse]

Fetlife might well be full of crowing, but it is true that the vanilla world is not ordinarily open to women discussing, openly, their nightly whippings, punishments, non-removable collars, being owned, tied up and fucked till you can't see straight... the list goes on.

Sorry for the snippage, but I consider the bolded bit to be things I am not open to discussing [as a "non-vanilla" woman] because A) it's not really anyone else's business and B) I consider it unladylike to casually discuss the graphic details of one's sex life. (Before anyone asks, I consider it ungentlemanly to do so, as well... I'm an equal opportunity prude like that. )

Besides which, I'm a "kinky" woman who doesn't do whippings or punishment dynamics, doesn't believe in collars, and generally yawns at bondage. There I go being all "vanilla-y"...

In the nilla world, these things are, by and large, unacceptable behavior, and in my opinion, if you're on Fetlife and you express an anti-vanilla attitude, you've probably been up against some prejudice on the part of someone who told you how weird you were at one point, or maybe even called the cops.

I would disagree that this passion to separate oneself is born of prejudicial experiences; I suspect it's more of an "OMG lookie at my SPECIALNESS!" thing. A grouping exercise. Lord knows human beings can't stand to survive without cliques. LOL

So yes, there's a HUGE difference between being straight and vanilla and being kinky and more into something like Fetlife. And the difference has REAL consequences, and i will not willingly go back to being a vanilla ever again.

But see that's my thing; my confusion. What exactly is the HUGE difference? As I mentioned, 98% of the things on your list up top are not a part of my sex life, nor my relationships. I defer to my lover, I offer my talents to be used as he sees fit, I don't make the final decisions, I exist for his pleasure... which (depending on which way you tilt your head), is either the groundwork for something deliciously twisted, or a textbook definition of a good wife.

 

[teknight]

I kinda feel that that's what the use of the term vanilla entails- vanilla's pedestrian and banal and boring and base and kinda dumb.

is either the groundwork for something deliciously twisted, or a textbook definition of a good wife.

But a good wife should be deliciously twisted, says I.

 

[KoPilot]

Sorry for the snippage, but I consider the bolded bit to be things I am not open to discussing [as a "non-vanilla" woman] because A) it's not really anyone else's business and B) I consider it unladylike to casually discuss the graphic details of one's sex life. (Before anyone asks, I consider it ungentlemanly to do so, as well... I'm an equal opportunity prude like that. )

Besides which, I'm a "kinky" woman who doesn't do whippings or punishment dynamics, doesn't believe in collars, and generally yawns at bondage. There I go being all "vanilla-y"...



I would disagree that this passion to separate oneself is born of prejudicial experiences; I suspect it's more of an "OMG lookie at my SPECIALNESS!" thing. A grouping exercise. Lord knows human beings can't stand to survive without cliques. LOL



But see that's my thing; my confusion. What exactly is the HUGE difference? As I mentioned, 98% of the things on your list up top are not a part of my sex life, nor my relationships. I defer to my lover, I offer my talents to be used as he sees fit, I don't make the final decisions, I exist for his pleasure... which (depending on which way you tilt your head), is either the groundwork for something deliciously twisted, or a textbook definition of a good wife.

Thank god for people who are more eloquent than I am!

This is why I draw porn, not write it.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I need to find more recipes for cardamom. Bought a humongous jar of it for one recipe and haven't seen a need for it since. Suggestions?

Smash a few grains with the handle of a knife, and drop them into the coffee grinds when you make coffee. I especially love this in espresso...

add a little bit to any recipe that calls for cinnamon, the two together are heavenly!

here I go being all "vanilla-y"...

A flavour which, it has been noted, is lush and irresistable.

 

[Lizzie_Borden]

You know, I started thinking about couples I know as I read Lizzie's post...my own parents came to mind first.

IMHO, this proves the notion that universal labels are BS. I use labels as a way to sort or arrange ideas and people in my mind but those definitions are meaningless to someone else.

lol, i didn't get the connection either. guess we missed something.

as far as people living with power dynamics without the D/s label...well duh, of course they do. i would describe most intimate relationships between two people as having some sort of D/s dynamic. the labels don't make you who you are, they are just descriptors. if i had been fortunate enough to have been born in a different sort of culture or perhaps a slightly different time period, then my Master and i could have much the same sort of relationship we have now, except it would be called "Husband and wife."

I'm confused as to whether you are talking about vanilla here or some form of BDSM.




I think what Tek is saying, is that for a lot of people that would self identify as vanilla (if they knew the term even) they do a lot of the things that you mentioned. and some of them even have sex in positions other than the missionary. My suspicion is that the main difference is that in BDSM there is perhaps a self-awareness that allows for the understanding of the power dynamics, which vanilla relationships don't have because we have been socialised into our roles so completely we don't even see them as anything other than just us being 'us'.

Holy crap on a cracker, I totally didn't get my point across, did I?

lol

What I was *trying* to say, was that I understand how some people have a difficult time reconciling themselves in the 'bdsm' world and in the 'vanilla' world.. when the 'vanilla' world might not meet some of their needs the way the 'bdsm' world might, and they'd need to adjust the way they interact with that world.

It had nothing to do with people living dynamics and not labeling them.

 

[where]

I'm also partial to cardamom

I need to find more recipes for cardamom. Bought a humongous jar of it for one recipe and haven't seen a need for it since. Suggestions?

I have a recipie for white chocolate cardamom mousse. It is like little spoons of heaven.

Holy crap on a cracker, I totally didn't get my point across, did I?

lol

What I was *trying* to say, was that I understand how some people have a difficult time reconciling themselves in the 'bdsm' world and in the 'vanilla' world.. when the 'vanilla' world might not meet some of their needs the way the 'bdsm' world might, and they'd need to adjust the way they interact with that world.

It had nothing to do with people living dynamics and not labeling them.

no you didn't. you should be flogged til you learn to be more articulate. or something.

 

[sardoniclaugh]

i would draw a very clear and obvious distinction between the nilla life and the non-vanilla life... the extent to which you incorporate aspects of BDSM into your life will determine how vanilla you are, and many vanillas are probably doing it and feeling guilty or ashamed... i tried living in a vanilla marriage for 25 years, and there is a HUGE difference between that and being in a relationship where i can be who i really am. The OP's question was basically, what's the big deal, and are those who profess to not be vanilla elitists? I'd have to say, yes, those who define themselves as kinky (not a word i prefer, since i believe all sexual practices should be able to come out of the closet and be considered normal, since they involve human behavior) usually also see themselves as "better" than everyone else, because they consider themselves to be more open-minded.

Of course, that's not really true, because once you claim you're open-minded, yet you're mad at those you claim are not, you've shown your lack of open-mindedness, but we shall forgive them for the time being, since they are in the early stages of self-discovery, as many others have pointed out, and are proselytizing.

However, I'd say if you knew gays as I did prior to the time when being gay was relatively acceptable, and knew their deep emotional pain at having to hide who they were, you'd understand right away the difference between being able to express your sexuality openly (Fetlife, kink, BDSM, etc.) and having to hide it in the nilla world cause you're scaring the straights. Literally.

Fetlife might well be full of crowing, but it is true that the vanilla world is not ordinarily open to women discussing, openly, their nightly whippings, punishments, non-removable collars, being owned, tied up and fucked till you can't see straight... the list goes on. In the nilla world, these things are, by and large, unacceptable behavior, and in my opinion, if you're on Fetlife and you express an anti-vanilla attitude, you've probably been up against some prejudice on the part of someone who told you how weird you were at one point, or maybe even called the cops. So yes, there's a HUGE difference between being straight and vanilla and being kinky and more into something like Fetlife. And the difference has REAL consequences, and i will not willingly go back to being a vanilla ever again.

Now, am I "better" than someone else who is vanilla because of that?

I want them to find their happiness, but not at the expense of mine, or anyone else who expresses their sexual needs differently than "the norm," since the norm keeps changing over time, depending on who's in power and prevailing psychosocial opinions.

YAY for this ... really well said

 

[Netzach]

Sorry for the snippage, but I consider the bolded bit to be things I am not open to discussing [as a "non-vanilla" woman] because A) it's not really anyone else's business and B) I consider it unladylike to casually discuss the graphic details of one's sex life. (Before anyone asks, I consider it ungentlemanly to do so, as well... I'm an equal opportunity prude like that. )

Besides which, I'm a "kinky" woman who doesn't do whippings or punishment dynamics, doesn't believe in collars, and generally yawns at bondage. There I go being all "vanilla-y"...



I would disagree that this passion to separate oneself is born of prejudicial experiences; I suspect it's more of an "OMG lookie at my SPECIALNESS!" thing. A grouping exercise. Lord knows human beings can't stand to survive without cliques. LOL



But see that's my thing; my confusion. What exactly is the HUGE difference? As I mentioned, 98% of the things on your list up top are not a part of my sex life, nor my relationships. I defer to my lover, I offer my talents to be used as he sees fit, I don't make the final decisions, I exist for his pleasure... which (depending on which way you tilt your head), is either the groundwork for something deliciously twisted, or a textbook definition of a good wife.

I agree. I can't exactly hide the gender transition of my partner or the parts I have with someone when I'm walking down the street with them, but I sure the fuck can resist the urge to put them on a leash when running out to Target for more paper towels. If I can't , it's on me. Not on the world.

BDSM is not equivalent to teh gay, not by a long shot. I've never heard a gay BDSM person agree that it was, not once. "Having to hide who you are fundamentally" is something adults have to do in the public sphere to some degree or M would be running round naked and I'd be kicking right wing whiners like this dude at the bar last night in the shins.