What is vanilla? (67)

Is vanilla defined by a state of mind or a list of activities?

The handcuff debate was an interesting read but does beg the question above.

It seemed that a couple of responses to that thread had a genuine disparaging tone because some people may just like to keep the kinky stuff in the bedroom or who actually enjoy spanking and handcuffs.

If the definition of vanilla is no kink at all, then I would imagine 90% of the population are in fact not vanilla.

My fourth question is, would you choose not to partake of an activity or use an object purely because "vanilla" people may indulge?

J

Is vanilla defined by a state of mind or a list of activities? - I'd say it was defined by a lack of kink

My fourth question is, would you choose not to partake of an activity or use an object purely because "vanilla" people may indulge? Absolutely not. I've currently got the oven on and I'm sure vanilla people use those too.

By the way, you went straight from question 2 to question 4 via a couple of observations. Can we decide what question 3 should have been?

"Sits alone and bends his cane, same old backsides again" - Madness

Q1 was in the title which was probably very similar to Q3.

I am interested most of all in people's definitions.

J

*UPDATE* Model(s) for "how to" bondage photographs (and other bondage photographs) have now been found. Thank you to all who showed interest.

Here is the IC Dictionary definition of Vanilla

'Vanilla is a term that refers to what a society considers to be standard or normal. It can be applied in various ways to refer to lifestyle, sex, behaviour or simply attitude. Different cultures, subcultures, and individuals have different ideas about what is normal and so vanilla has no direct meaning other than in relationship to the alternate under discussion.'

Nothing wrong with vanilla. People do use it to be disparaging about other people's life choices but they shouldn't.

I always use vanilla to refer to activities, not people and so vanilla to me means non-kinky (sexual) relationships. I think there are actually very few completely vanilla relationships.

I do not define myself against what other people do but instead do what I enjoy. So, it might seem a 'vanilla' thing to some people but I wouldn't give a damn. I am not into bdsm to be consciously different or deliberately position myself outside of the mainstream. It is just where I found I was and have accepted and enjoyed where this has taken me. If kinky stuff like D/s, CP and sexual control was 100%mainstream, I would still enjoy doing it as it is just what has always been inside of me.

Dominant partner in an FLR with @paulss

Thanks

J

It's a bit like science fiction - there are plenty of mainstream authors who are at pains to say they DON'T write SF because they don't want to be associated with it. On the other hand, they still write stories about alternative futures, artificial life forms etc.

The definition I think states my standpoint ..'...vanilla has no direct meaning other than in relationship to the alternate under discussion.' Basically, someone's vanilla's is someone else's kink, is someone else's extreme. Whatever....enjoy xxxx

confused.....

No, some people just want to use other people for what they can get with no consideration for how it is done or consequences. To call your perfectly reasonable caution an example of vanilla (and presumably wrong) thinking is actually an example of something else...BDSM bullshit.

Dominant partner in an FLR with @paulss

A friend of mine was recently quite upset because she didn't feel able to comply with a scenario her Dominant wanted her to partake in. His answer to her distress was to tell her she had a vanilla streak running through her and that as such she would never be genuinely submissive.

I find this way of thinking absurd, the handcuffs thread and some of the responses reminded me of this and inspired to me ask other peoples views on the definition of vanilla.