fucktoyprincess
Posts: 2337
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: JeffBC quote:
ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess Quite frankly, and I mean no ill-respect, but why, really, would you want to identify as vanilla?  Isn't that a lot like asking someone "Why would you want to identify as gay?" I pick labels not because I "want" them. I pick them because they are accurate descriptions to the best of my ability to understand "accurate". Internally, I didn't self-identify as kinky and I felt more at home with the vanilla mindset. it's a lot like saying, "I would pick 'gay' if I was turned on by male bodies". The reasons for that, I suspect, are largely contained in this statement. But I actually think the line between BDSM and vanilla is a clear one. I've never encountered anyone into kink who didn't self-identify as a kinkster (at the bare minimum) or into BDSM, specifically. Maybe this is because I am into S&M (where to me the line seems quite a bright one)? Trust me on this. Without the SM component it is a lot like being a stranger in a strange land. A fair number of posters here agree that in the absence of bondage, discipline, sadism or masochism you're not into BDSM. It's not an entirely unreasonable viewpoint. My point about why would you want to identify as vanilla was not meant to disparage vanilla. My point is, that given the range of things that you and your wife are interested in, I guess I'm not sure how the term "vanilla" would have ever applied. Most of my friends and family are vanilla. I have nothing against vanilla for those who are, in fact, vanilla. To each his or her own. I'm respectful of that. But if you are into the kinks that you claim to be into, I'm not sure how the label "vanilla" would have ever applied. And while the line is quite bright with respects to S&M, I was actually suggesting that if you are into " non-S&M kink", in my world, that would still mean you were not vanilla. In other words, I'm suggesting you are like a gay man who doesn't want to embrace the term "gay". You are a kinkster who still wants to use the label vanilla. This is what I don't quite understand. I've had many vanilla bfs and relationships. I have nothing against vanilla. But if you are into the type of kink that you and your wife are into, I don't think that qualifies as vanilla in my mind. My perspective. Others don't have to share. But if you and your wife were to introduce yourselves to me at a party and when I raised the topic of kink, both said, "oh, no, no - we're not into BDSM, we are vanilla", personally, I would think that a mis-characterization of the dynamic that you have in your relationship. Yes, at the end of the day these are all labels, but I agree with you about if you are attracted to men, well then, you are gay. I think to continue to use the label straight doesn't work.
_____________________________
~ ftp
|