Could you do a Vanilla relationship?

[tinyandcold]

I' m honestly curious to see if after being introduced to DDLG if anyone could go back to the "normal vanilla type"?

[Jessmont]

I guess It could work for me but It would be pretty hard to do so because I couldn't stop being a little/daddy and that's not something that you just leave or forget, it's sometimes part of you. 

[Ryan C.]

I could. I've always been into vanilla based relationships, I've learned about this community about almost 2 months ago, so I'm still new nonetheless. Yet, even if I have a strong relationship with someone involving DDL/g, going back to vanilla based relationships would be no problem for me.

[Guest LavanderRabbit]

I could. I don't plan on it. I only say that because I have little trust in people and really the only person I can call my caregiver is the one I am with. If something were to happen and I had to start all over I probably wouldn't date anymore.

[snuggleprincess]

Nope!  I can't go back.  I'd be so bored and unsatisfied,and I would always know in the back of my mind that things would not work out in the end.  Now I know what all my previous relationships were lacking and I cant settle for one without it.

Edited June 14, 2016 by snuggleprincess

[LoralieHaze]

I would be open to starting a vanilla relationship because I know at some point I would tell them about DDlg and hopefully (because I usually go for Daddy types) they would be open to exploring it. Even if they didn't want to explore it, that wouldn't stop me from being a Little.

[Guest Zips]

I'm finished repressing aspects of my personality, from now on I need to be completely open about things or I'll never be happy. For me, I agree with LittleKittenLo, in that I could start a vanilla and progress from there, but I would find that much harder, because it's like working backwards for me. So personally, I could do one, but not indefinitely.

[LoralieHaze]

I'm finished repressing aspects of my personality, from now on I need to be completely open about things or I'll never be happy. For me, I agree with LittleKittenLo, in that I could start a vanilla and progress from there, but I would find that much harder, because it's like working backwards for me. So personally, I could do one, but not indefinitely.

 

It would be hard, and there's always the possibility of them freaking out when you tell them, but the CG/L community is relatively quite small so we would be limiting ourselves a great deal by only dating people who are already in the know. Also, from what I've read of other people's experiences, it is rather common for very successful CG/L relationships to grow from one person introducing the dynamic to the other. I've heard so many stories of both caregivers and littles "waking up" in a way when their partners told them about it while in a vanilla relationship. 

[Guest Zips]

It would be hard, and there's always the possibility of them freaking out when you tell them, but the CG/L community is relatively quite small so we would be limiting ourselves a great deal by only dating people who are already in the know. Also, from what I've read of other people's experiences, it is rather common for very successful CG/L relationships to grow from one person introducing the dynamic to the other. I've heard so many stories of both caregivers and littles "waking up" in a way when their partners told them about it while in a vanilla relationship. 

True, it's *small* but I don't think it's quite that small. I think I find the prospect of a CG/L relationship much simpler because they're more open by nature. Thinking about vanilla just scares me xD

[Amilialeigh1221]

I have had plenty of vanilla relationships that have left me unsatisfied and ultimately ended up damaging the relationship. DD/lg is part of who I am as a person and is an aspect I need in my relationship. So, before I start any kind of relationship I make it very clear as to what I am looking for and what I need from my partner. It has really helped in weeding out the people who just aren't a good fit for me!

[A&Ω]

Well... I don't define relationships by a vanilla or non vanilla. I did when I first joined but looking back on my growth and understanding as time went on, it's just a relationship. A relationship with a dynamic enjoyed by both (or more than 2).

 

I've learned that I appreciate more of a dynamic closer to head of household instead of classic daddy little dynamic. I want to elevate and help bring new experiences. I'm not into the "you shouldn't be playing with scissors..." dynamic. Not that there is anything wierd about it. Just not my flavor of Corn flakes.

 

So the question of vanilla relationship definition to me what are the terms we agree on. If there is no dynamic (bdsm) then that is a relationship nonetheless

[PortlandDaddy]

Having now been awoken to DD/lg, I can't go back to a vanilla relationship.

 

I choose to be alone and looking than committed and unsatisfied.

[Guest Ginger-Kit22]

I could but eventually, I think I'd feel... compelled to tell them about the other side of me? I grew up repressing who I was really was and it made me miserable. My relationship currently started vanilla but it isn't anymore and I couldn't be happier. He loves me and wants me to be whoever I am, even if that's ever changing. Same goes for him.

[Guest MontBlanc]

Yes, very easily.  My most fulfilling relationships were 'vanilla' (in fact they have all been haha) but i would not pass up the opportunity to be in a relationship with a great person because of a lack of DDLG - but that is just me.  I am curious about ddlg but is not a must.  Even vanilla relationships can have certain D/S dynamics and most certainly they can have a CG role - it just isn't the centre piece - which is something i would be more comfortable with.   I couldn't commit to a full on ddlg lifestyle.

[Trixie]

I probably could, my mate would have to have lots of areas that would be able to satisfy my other needs and also i would have to have discipline. I believe for a certain person perhaps, and since people change over time we might change in certain areas... If I chose to be in a vanilla relationship then that means I've asked the right questions before hand hopefully and made a decision to accept them for who they are as a person.

[Harley_Quinn]

I've never been in a vanilla relationship xD so I guess not. They've all be with some form of BDSM and if not then they weren't relationships but one night stands.

[Big Red]

Too far in to be with normal people anymore :/ I don't see anyone that's not a little or a raver, and its getting to the point where I want both, or at least a little at this point only.

 

I feel it would be unfair for me to date normal women at this point and not tell them about my lifestyle so open up with that which does help limit to those with my preferences at least.

[Trixie]

Yes, very easily.  My most fulfilling relationships were 'vanilla' (in fact they have all been haha) but i would not pass up the opportunity to be in a relationship with a great person because of a lack of DDLG - but that is just me.  I am curious about ddlg but is not a must.  Even vanilla relationships can have certain D/S dynamics and most certainly they can have a CG role - it just isn't the centre piece...

nicely put

[Spring~Faerie]

[littlelili]

I totally could. ^^ I think that imposing ddlg to someone as a condition to have a happy fulfilling relationship is a little hard. I agree with Mont, what if the person is awesome and has a lot of good things to share with you but it's not into ddlg?? You could be wasting a good chance to be happy and meet someone wonderful.

[Ryan C.]

I totally could. ^^ I think that imposing ddlg to someone as a condition to have a happy fulfilling relationship is a little hard. I agree with Mont, what if the person is awesome and has a lot of good things to share with you but it's not into ddlg?? You could be wasting a good chance to be happy and meet someone wonderful.

 

That's a very good point. Don't throw away an opportunity like that away, at least give it one more try if you have given up with vanilla relationships.

[LolitasDaddy]

I would only consider building on a vanilla relationship. Having an adult side that I can trust, respect, love and rely on is far too important to just not be open to. I'd never want to start out a relationship based on any kink. My lovely little and I started as vanilla, and I think it helped us grow much more trusting and close than if we had started out with me being her Daddy.

[DaddysLolita]

I would only consider building on a vanilla relationship. Having an adult side that I can trust, respect, love and rely on is far too important to just not be open to. I'd never want to start out a relationship based on any kink. My lovely little and I started as vanilla, and I think it helped us grow much more trusting and close than if we had started out with me being her Daddy.

 

I agree.

[PortlandDaddy]

While I'm in complete agreement that there has to be a meaningful adult side for any long term relationship to work, I've seen and heard (so many times that I've lost count) what happens when two people fall in love and don't share the same kinks.  They either break up, cheat, suffer unfulfilled, or open their marriage.  That last option can work but only with hard work, love and a mutual desire for it.

 

This is a big reason why a lot of relationships fail: because one partner is sexually unfulfilled by the other.

 

tl;dr: before you make a meaningful life commitment with someone, make sure your kinks line up.  You'll thank me years later.

[Daddy's Lil]

NOPE! But then I've been a swinger for 8 years too as well and I could not stop that either.