Vanilla

[Be****]

So I’ve been speaking to a number of Subs now about their vanilla experiences. I think one of them might be onto something. She believes that men that lack intimacy, crave vanilla missionary sex. Those that have experienced love and those that have been ok to share their emotions at young ages are totally cool to go as kinky as hell. Do you agree or disagree? Do you think there’s more to it than this? Personally for me, I just get bored. There’s nothing wrong with vanilla, but kinky Dom/Sub role-plays are way more fun.


[To****]

I think there's a lot more to it. I think it's about fantasies in our minds and our willingness to share. So the correlation, I think, is how comfortable you are to share your fantasies with your partner/s. If you get shot down just having sex with the light on, for example, then I doubt you will bother mentioning ball gags and floggers.

[cu****]

Yeah I can see this. My ex was more into intimate, “vanilla” sex. He’d do kinkier stuff if in the mood but mostly he preferred just being intimate. Definitely lacked emotional attention growing up/was told to hide his emotions

[ey****]

it feels anecdotal

so it is true that upbringing and experiences can shape a lot in later life - patterns are complex

So some people who've lacked intimacy, crave it - but while vanilla sex can be intimate - so is most kink play.

some of the needy subs comes from this also.

But there's also some who've lacked intimacy which can make it difficult for them to build connections or empathy - and sometimes that plays into a kink route (say, a cold Dominant)

there's people into things like Mommy Domme/babyboy where their mother may have died early or abandoned them; but then plenty where they didn't get into this and it didn't happen.

 

There's a link, but it's complex. 

[Je****]

I had a horrid unloving upbringing, from all people involved besides one of my grandparents, and I am kinky and enjoy spice and variety.
That being said, I also like vanilla now and then.
I do vanilla kind of sex for the intimacy and love and affection with my partner.
The kink sex stuff, is for fun and giggles and stuff like that.
I don't look for some deep rooting to it though.
I like a healthy balance of both kink and vanilla with my partner, everything in moderation.

[MasterDarcy1979]

It's nuanced.

You can't really categories people.

From a formative age I've been described as "cold" and "distant" and "aloof", etc, which is just another way of lacking intimacy. And yet my kinks and fetishes and desires are extreme.

There's a grey area.

[Mo****]

It might be a sign they're still craving more intimacy. We tend to severely underestimate how much men can crave cuddles and closeness and just being cared for. I wonder if giving them more of it outside the bedroom might let them be more adventurous in the bedroom.

[Th****]

It's way more complex than just that with so many different variables. Nature vs nurture, attachment style, what all someone has knowledge of and has been exposed to in their lives, their social circles, how open someone is to variations from the norm in general. 

As mentioned before, anecdotal and correlation =/= causation. 

[Deleted Member]

Well I have mommy issues from having to repress emotions and not feeling loved as a child. Anything vanilla feels almost like a chore to me unless it has the context of the woman being in charge.

[st****]

I think it's all about trust. If it's it's sport f***ing,it is what it is. If it's a relationship the whole dynamic is different. Then it's about being able to open up and trust a person with things that can be very personal.

[se****]

Interesting discussion. While I do believe that in a perfect world BDSM/kink should exist with more intimacy because of the level of trust required, it’s not necessarily what actually happens. I’ve had insane intimacy in kink dynamics and I’ve also had straight up *** and detached sexual encounters that straight up lack intimacy. People just wanting to get off but they prefer grabbing a woman’s hair and calling her names while they do it.

I’ve also had intimacy in vanilla dynamics and in missionary positions as well- it can be very intimate to connect with someone face to face and look into each other’s eyes. It’s kinda how much you put into either dynamic and the moment.

I think the real deal is that many people- in kink and vanilla dynamics don’t always know how to create intimacy or let themselves be *** to experience it. I think in bdsm communities many can lack even more intimacy because men and women who lean more dominant can struggle with the notion that they can still be *** and develop intimacy. I think they see it as weakness and a form of submission.

Side note- I think many people are attracted to bdsm and kink when they actually have experienced levels of ***/sexual trauma in their life. I think they want ownership over what has happened to them and their tastes and preferences also change as a result of their experiences/exposure, which can develop into some pretty interesting kinks. But I actually think while their previous *** might heighten their kinks and variety of sexual interests…..if unresolved and under processed, it limits their ability to find intimacy and trust others. I think that’s why there’s a lot of unchecked *** and retraumatization occurring in the bdsm/kink community.

[Ae****]

Vanilla sex may be satisfying to some because they have not been overstimulated by p*rn and have a healthy relationship with control and a feeling of personal safety - no need to desperately feel powerful and strong as a dom, and no need to stop thinking and give up responsibility as a sub.

[Ae****]

8 hours ago, jayraven said:

Well I have mommy issues from having to repress emotions and not feeling loved as a child. Anything vanilla feels almost like a chore to me unless it has the context of the woman being in charge.

😔❤️

[li****]

Me and my man crave kinky. But I believe it all comes down to trust

[Deleted Member]

Hard disagree to the point where I think that's outright wrong with a hint of a red flag. It's an extremely reductionist view. To boil it down to one particular aspect completely misses the entire point of any kind of sex: the other person, in their entirety, at their most ***.

[Deleted Member]

This also has huge "started psychology at uni last week and now I'm an expert" vibes.

[Ki****]

Obviously anecdotal but an interesting observation.

[St****]

bigcupoftea: I believe your analysis is spot on.

[Ae****]

Yesterday at 06:55 AM, bigcupoftea said:

This also has huge "started psychology at uni last week and now I'm an expert" vibes.

These two comments - just wanna say - whoever this was meant for, cuz it's not really clear to me - this seems quite condescending. Let people have their views and freely share them, and be humble enough to allow for the idea that you may not be informed on something that someone else is, and for the possibility that... you don't really know... actually, maybe you have red flags in your cognitive blind spots. We are all learning and are probably wrong about things that we'll have better views on in a year or 5 from now. Condescension says more about the the speaker than those who are being spoken on. The same thoughts can be communicated with more kindness, respect and good, friendly nature.

[na****]

Interesting. Every person that has engaged in any intimate/ sexual contact has had a “vanilla” experience and will continue to in their own dynamic. Regardless of how they define themselves as they navigate through their sexual intimate relationship and dynamics for the foreseeable. These may also change at any time or moment in their lives. For many reasons. None of which have anything to do with sexual positions or age etc. Even “vanilla” relationships have kinky sex all the time. Kinky does not ultimately relate to either a vanilla or D/s role dynamic given the versatility of the roles expressed in both. I really don’t think this is as complex as maybe initially thought. What works for both or all parties, simply works.

[Za****]

Man, I just crave affection
So by that point I'd agree too

[Deleted Member]

14 hours ago, Aeonova said:

These two comments - just wanna say - whoever this was meant for, cuz it's not really clear to me - this seems quite condescending. Let people have their views and freely share them, and be humble enough to allow for the idea that you may not be informed on something that someone else is, and for the possibility that... you don't really know... actually, maybe you have red flags in your cognitive blind spots. We are all learning and are probably wrong about things that we'll have better views on in a year or 5 from now. Condescension says more about the the speaker than those who are being spoken on. The same thoughts can be communicated with more kindness, respect and good, friendly nature.

For the most part I agree about sharing opinions and my tone. But the core of the posted idea is that kink is somehow a more evolved, more (emotionally) mature, sexual experience over vanilla. It's not new and it's not acceptable. It is, however, hugely condescending. It has no place in a community that is supposedly grounded on ideas of inclusion.

[Ae****]

17 hours ago, bigcupoftea said:

For the most part I agree about sharing opinions and my tone. But the core of the posted idea is that kink is somehow a more evolved, more (emotionally) mature, sexual experience over vanilla. It's not new and it's not acceptable. It is, however, hugely condescending. It has no place in a community that is supposedly grounded on ideas of inclusion.

Oh. I get that the idea is annoying, and I also agree that kink is in no way better or less than standard sex, but the OP was just stating what they thought and then openly asking if people agreed or not - not stating that they were certain. I think that's pretty decent and fair of them to do, and I struggle to think of how they could have asked it any better, myself, so I still think they deserve to not be told they have red flags etc. I think it's quite presumptuous, i dunno.

[Le****]

I disagree. "Missionary" is one of the few positions, especially for the less athletic, that allows for deep intimacy with so much skin contact and ability to kiss and embrace during intercourse. If anything I'd say it's loads more intimate than front to back positions like "Doggie" style