Stephann
Posts: 4214
Joined: 12/27/2006
From: Portland, OR
Status: offline
|
Micheal and others,
Good topic and questions. First, I'll briefly say that the semantics and label rejection shouldn't be a problem on this topic, as long as everyone is specific in their points. I remember LA mentioning once how symbols have power, and I took it to heart. Labels are symbols, even if they don't have the same impact on everyone, it doesn't detract from the intent of the user. With this in mind, the symbolic 'vanilla' relationship I will refer to as a relationship between two (or more) people that are not BDSM/D/s/M/s/Gor/AlphabetSoup aware. Dominance and submission exist in both quantities in all relationships whether the participants are aware of these factors or not; when we breath air, we're taking in 78% nitrogen whether we know it or not.
D/s existing in all relationships is expressed differently, by different people. The vanilla man you mentioned shows the impact of a man who appears to be generally submissive to his wife. This doesn't mean he is incapble of dominance; if he has people working under him, they must naturally respect his authority. It means that in his relationship with the woman he loves, he is submissive to her. It is not impossible to conceive that should he subsequently marry another, much more submissive woman, that he would assume a dominant role. We don't necessarily set out to 'be' more dominant or submissive, especially if we are unaware of these dynamics. Most people will live and die without learning the terminology that we use daily on these boards; yet somehow manage to muddle through, and find happiness in the same way we muddle through life only knowing one word for 'snow.'
I am of the opinion that when we come to understand how these forces influence our lives, we assert a greater deal of control over them in the same way that we can assert control over our own bodies through diet and exercise. A similar example might be the realization for a person that they are homosexual, well into their 20s, 30s, or 40s. Odds are, those feelings were always dormant, but lack of attention paid to sexual preferences doesn't not necessarily mean those preferences do not influence our actions. I know from my personal experiences, understanding how dominance and submission impacts all relationships, I have a better understanding of why people react the way they do to other people. It's worth mentioning, that I am not speaking strictly of romantic relationships, but all relationships in general; the private dentist/patient relationship is worth looking it, as on one hand the dentist is in an authoritarian role, but at the same time in a 'customer service' role. These are, on the surface, conflicting expectations socially (and a good reason why medical professions often employ secretaries and nurses to 'bully' patients into co-operating.) I remember one dentist well, who was consistently did not use enough local pain medication, even after we'd spoken of the issue twice, and I eventually changed dentists. His professional opinion was that less local anesthesia was better during said root canal, which conflicted with my expectation he provide acceptable customer service.
I can't agree that the relationship is based on the expectation of authority. Vanilla folk don't usually enter a relationship with a clearly formed intention of asserting or deferring to authority. Non-Vanilla folk i.e. those familiar with WIITWD will likely have some concept of how authority will impact their relationship, be it giving, receiving, exchanging, borrowing, selling, or playing rock-paper-scissors for it but the inherent awareness of how authority exchange will impact their interaction gives them a base from which to draw from. Authority exchange needn't be a focal point for a relationship to be successful; personally, I think successful relationship derive from exchanges of more personal elements, such as mutual interests, compatible goals, musical/artistic/literature/cultural tastes, shared activities, and a whole host of other non-sexual, non-D/s, non-Gorean, non-BDSM, non-Campbell's Soup influenced issues.
A quick note on online verses offline; it would seem that online, we tend to explore the theory behind relationships in far greater detail than we would in a typical public conversation. This seems to hold true for many types of conversations that we wouldn't likely have with people who were not close friends, and not just on WIITWD topics. I simply don't have a large enough pool of real life, kink aware friends to be able to engage in these sorts of conversations with; thus I enjoy them here. In large part, much of what I write is for the purpose of forcing my mind to the task, so that I might understand an element or aspect of that concept better. That my ramblings have any value to the public or community at large ends up only being a bonus.
Stephan
_____________________________
Nosce Te Ipsum
"The blade itself incites to violence" - Homer
Men: Find a Woman here
|
RE: Is BDSM, D/s, and Gor Vanilla? - 
Profile
). My close female friends all have had kinks and liked role play (the vanilla ones). Most people have kinky fantasies, role play, and are sexually imaginative at times.. so the vast majority of people are probably not vanilla.
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