Stephann
Posts: 4214
Joined: 12/27/2006
From: Portland, OR
Status: offline
|
96,
I get what you're trying to say. I will illustrate to you, that what you identify as the vanilla relationship underneath, is likely a common romantic relationship that you expect to have in your relationships with another submissive. Many here will agree that the best romantic relationships have 'love first' and apply power exchange on that foundation of love. I would suggest that is a lovely way to start in the lifestyle, and the premise of, say, Castle-realm. It doesn't work for me.
My particular ideal of romantic relationships establishes the Master/slave dynamic first, and separately from the romantic entaglement. The authority transfer is independant (as much as possible) from the emotional element; essentially I am making an intellectual assertion over my expectations of a relationship. The slave can appreciate, enjoy, and grow within this framework, or she may choose a different partner. Still, these are ideals and would necessarily be adjusted, depending on the woman I become involved in; I don't value BDSM or M/s 'over' love, I just have a good idea of how I wish the two to ideally mix.
Dear Lawrence,
I see where you are coming from as well. I agree there is a power exchange involved in just about every relationship beyond mere acquaintences. What I term vanilla, is when one of the people involved are not familiar with the terminology, or in being familiar with it they do not engage in behavior that represents either the roles or activities that are commonly found in a BDSM relationship.
With this in mind, a 1950s Ward and June may clearly be living a D/s lifestyle, but their lack of awareness of this interaction would term them 'vanilla' to me. Supposing LA's mom (to springboard her example) was self-identified as a lifestyle dominant, this would not mean their relationship is kinked or D/s oriented; even as they are both aware of D/s or BDSM interactions, they would not make an active choice or effort to include or exhibit those roles and behaviors. Self-awareness is a key componant, but I would imagine a couple who regularly uses crops, floggers, bondage, or other typical activities without any previous knowledge or exposure to the lifestyle, would still fall under the heading 'BDSM.' So, knowledge of the lifestyle isn't necessarily a requirement, but people involved in these sorts of activities in their private lives, generally, are aware that they are engaging in behavior that is outside of the norm. Thus, for me, Vanilla refers to the collective group of people who are largely ignorant (and content to be ignorant) of WIITWD.
Warm Regards,
Stephan
_____________________________
Nosce Te Ipsum
"The blade itself incites to violence" - Homer
Men: Find a Woman here
|
RE: BDSM 101 - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread