Dom/sub, top/bottom

[papilllon]

From what I perceive so far, titles really mean something for some people and if both partners want to use them, than by all mean they should feel free to do it. But in my opinion, a dominant man would still be as dominant whether you call him Sir, Master, love or simply Jack. To me, it’s about who he is as a man, however he’s called. And the same applies for a woman with submissive characteristics.

All these labels are confusing me a bit, I must admit… None of them seem to really suit who I am as a human being. Part of me is bottom, part is submissive and there are days when I feel like chewing someone’s head, so maybe there are some type of dominant traits in there either (although the idea of topping a man doesn’t attract me at all).

The problem for me with all these labels is that they seem very limiting. I feel like I’m submissive but I like to speak my mind, be heard and I wouldn’t comply with just anything. I’m certainly a bottom, but to me, submission doesn’t start and stop in the bedroom. I like to be spanked but I don’t consider myself a masochist. I like the concept of my partner being head-of-the-house but I definitely don’t want one who is a Master.

How can so few titles be a fit-for-all?

Some individuals may define themselves as Doms, Tops or Masters, but I’m certain there are lots of people who are a bit of these things without defining themselves as such. Life is rarely black or white and we can find an incredible range of shades of grey.

Besides, what do these titles really mean when their description is very different from one person to the next?

Ah, well… The confusion remains.

 

[Rox_shybutcurious]

From what I perceive so far, titles really mean something for some people and if both partners want to use them, than by all mean they should feel free to do it. But in my opinion, a dominant man would still be as dominant whether you call him Sir, Master, love or simply Jack. To me, it’s about who he is as a man, however he’s called. And the same applies for a woman with submissive characteristics.

All these labels are confusing me a bit, I must admit… None of them seem to really suit who I am as a human being. Part of me is bottom, part is submissive and there are days when I feel like chewing someone’s head, so maybe there are some type of dominant traits in there either (although the idea of topping a man doesn’t attract me at all).

The problem for me with all these labels is that they seem very limiting. I feel like I’m submissive but I like to speak my mind, be heard and I wouldn’t comply with just anything. I’m certainly a bottom, but to me, submission doesn’t start and stop in the bedroom. I like to be spanked but I don’t consider myself a masochist. I like the concept of my partner being head-of-the-house but I definitely don’t want one who is a Master.

How can so few titles be a fit-for-all?

Some individuals may define themselves as Doms, Tops or Masters, but I’m certain there are lots of people who are a bit of these things without defining themselves as such. Life is rarely black or white and we can find an incredible range of shades of grey.

Besides, what do these titles really mean when their description is very different from one person to the next?

Ah, well… The confusion remains.

Exactly. It can be very confusing and makes it difficult to figure out your place in it all.

Rox.

 

[Daddyslilpet]

The thing to remember is there are no right or wrong answers in BDSM technically. It's all about what it means to each individual couple, and could be broken down even further to each person. Some folks are just more adamant that their way is more right than anyone else's, which is a crock of shit. Everyone does things their own way, and as long as it's consentual, between two adults, and everyone involved is happy then what's the harm?

That's just my thoughts, take them for what they are worth. Use what ya like and leave the rest.

 

[JMohegan]

Great post, Papillon. And Dixicritter - I absolutely agree.

The problem I see for newcomers, though, is that it's very hard to identify or talk about what you might want or need when everyone seems to be talking about something different at a munch or on this board.

Without words that mean anything definitive, it's really hard to have a meaningful discussion, here or anywhere else.

I am not arguing for uniform definitions here. That's flatly unrealistic.

But I do think that people who use words like Dom, sub, Top, switch, etc. should be able and willing to provide their own working definitions of those terms. If you (general "you") can't, then in my opinion you shouldn't be using those terms in a public setting. It's like having your own secret code, but refusing to share the key with everyone else. Your posts will be misleading at best and at worst total nonsense.

 

[midwestyankee]

As a relative newbie to the concerns of BDSM, I puzzled over this same confusion for quite a while.

After a good bit of reading in the classic texts (SM 101, The Loving Dominant, for example), it occurred to that the labeling problem is similar to semantic differences in academic circles. Two different experts can analyze the same area of study and come up with two very different descriptions. They both use particular words in very specific ways in order to make their description clear. Problems arise when both use the same word, but in slightly different ways. Later, their followers have trouble communicating with each other because they can't get past the differences in the ways those certain words were used.

The terms "dominant," "top," and "master" all describe people who live near one end of the BDSM spectrum while those near the other end are often called "submissive," "bottom," and "slave." To some extent the clarity and accuracy of the descriptive force of these words is dependent on the dynamic between the two people whose relationship is being described.

In other words, various people within the larger BDSM community use these words in varying ways to describe their own or other relationships. It's a little disconcerting to begin to read something, perhaps a well-written and insightful post here in this forum, and then stumble over the meaning because certain words are being used in a way that contradicts the way you understand them.

This is why I have come to appreciate the use of PYL and pyl. The simple distinction between capitalized and non-capitalized sets the two descriptors at opposite ends of the BDSM spectrum. And for the most part, people in conscious BDSM relationships operate from the two sides of the middle ground.

Of course, there is also the whole thing that went through my mind that "dominant" is a noun that does not have a closely analogous verb while "top" can be both a noun and a verb. Life can be so confusing when you spend so much time living at the semantic level.


edited to add: JMohegan's post above puts this into much more practical language, and much more succinctly.

 

[papilllon]

The problem I see for newcomers, though, is that it's very hard to identify or talk about what you might want or need when everyone seems to be talking about something different at a munch or on this board. Without words that mean anything definitive, it's really hard to have a meaningful discussion, here or anywhere else.

You're right that it helps to be able to use some sort of label to get at least a general idea of what someone might be looking for.

But I do think that people who use words like Dom, sub, Top, switch, etc. should be able and willing to provide their own working definitions of those terms.

Very true. Labels are just not specific enough.

 

[Bredon]

Ok, I'm a relative newbie to the whole BDSM scene, so I have just picked my words before I knew exactly what they meant for others.
When I first heard Dom/sub it appealed to me imediately, because it emphasized the mental element. S/M was always about rough play and leather for me, and as I don't like leather or heavy pain infliction, I thought I'm not into that.
It all depends on the BDSM people you know who call themselves certain words, that will shape your perception--
sub/Dom has a nice victorian feel to me, that just speaks to me.
Top/bottom is used out of BDSM contexts a lot where I live (meaning inserter and insertee), so that's just too wishy washy for my taste.

Bredon

 

[Rox_shybutcurious]

Great post, Papillon. And Dixicritter - I absolutely agree.

The problem I see for newcomers, though, is that it's very hard to identify or talk about what you might want or need when everyone seems to be talking about something different at a munch or on this board.

Thank you JM, I started the thread to figure out some things in my own nature and how they would be perceived. The postings here have definitely helped with that, but then raised the issue you presented above. I went ahead and started a new thread because now I'm interested in how people in general address this when meeting someone new.

Rox.

 

[neonflux]

This is very much the way I see it as well.

As a switch I Top or bottom. I do not Dom/sub or Master/slave.

Well I do "slave" to my two cats, but that is something else...

It's odd for me - while I seek egalitarian relationships outside of the bedroom, I enjoy - a lot- asserting dominance during play when topping, and this includes an element of mental control, as I give commands and absolutely expect them to be obeyed. While I would not consider myself a Domme, it is definitely a D/s vs. S/m dynamic. BTW, here is the real Dom in my home:

his favorite place, looking down on everyone else....

and here is his fat little minion!

don't let that pose fool you - he's about to get feisty!

Neon

 

[neonflux]

I do control behavior outside the bedroom, but the key word there is *behavior*. I have absolutely no interest in controlling someone's mind.

Do you think this relates to the difference between ceding or accepting control outside the bedroom for the purpose of molding/shaping/teaching the submissive partner, vs. ceding or accepting control simply because that's what makes each partner comfortable and happy? The former being characteristic of a Dom/sub partnership, and the latter being Top/bottom?

I am not sure there isn't a "Dominant" element in controlling behavior - even if you assume that your ply has desires, etc. separate from your own (and I cannot believe that anyone who is decent and living in the world wouldn't assume this, even of a contractual slave). she is still choosing to follow your behavioral instructions, whether or not he would prefer to do differently - the preference aspect is where I think the soul comes in - one gives up one's will as a slave, where a sub has more room to say no, to assert her own concerns, to negotiate her desires...

Topping/bottoming to me is completely a physical, more of an S/m rather than D/s type of thing... Oddly, while I play (bottom, no sex) occasionally with the friend who did my BDSM cleansing, there is no element of submission in what we do together. It really is a Top/bottom relationship. However, when I play with my kink partner, there is always that element of D/s regardless of who's Topping. I think we both like it this way (actually, he would say that he enjoys his submission more than he does his masochism while he enjoys both Dominance and Sadism equally...)

That said, while our play involves D/s, neither of us at this point would ever assume the title of Dom/me or sub... We're both newbies (6 months or so) and this may change in the future (however not with each other, since we are both at least as much Tops as bottoms, perhaps more).

Is this making any sense???

Neon

 

[JMohegan]

Is this making any sense???

Yes. Much more so than your previous post (to me).

I don't know if this is a right side/left side of the brain issue, or a male/female thing, or just the limit of my own cognitive abilities, but when the discussion gets too abstract, I tend to fall off the page in terms of my ability to comprehend what's being conveyed.

So when you originally wrote, "A bottom gives his body, a sub gives her mind, a slave gives his soul," my reaction was to scratch my head and say - what the heck does that mean!

Thank you for taking the time to clarify for me. What you seem to be saying is that the steps from bottom to sub to slave involve a progressive surrendering of free will. If so, this makes a lot of sense to me and matches my own view that the defining distinctions relate to control & power exchange.

To clarify my use of the word "steps" in the previous paragraph, I'll note that I do not see a finite number of the same. The progression takes the form of a line on the floor, rather than a series of stepping stones. Where one ends up on that line is a function of personal preferences and needs, and the needs/preferences of the partner one selects.

Thanks again for taking the time to clarify, Neon.

 

[papilllon]

It's odd for me - while I seek egalitarian relationships outside of the bedroom, I enjoy - a lot- asserting dominance during play when topping, and this includes an element of mental control, as I give commands and absolutely expect them to be obeyed. While I would not consider myself a Domme, it is definitely a D/s vs. S/m dynamic. BTW, here is the real Dom in my home:

his favorite place, looking down on everyone else....

and here is his fat little minion!

don't let that pose fool you - he's about to get feisty!

Neon

Your cat is so cuuuuuuuuute!

 

[Bredon]

Hm.. even though I think in the end this is just words and it is not a straight line from, lets say bottom to slave but rather, every relationship can contain a different combination of elements from every stage that is decribed--

I wonder why I consider myself a (fledgling) dom. I think it has to do with the fact that I *never* wanted to switch. And also with the extreme feeling of "this is my place" that I got when I actually topped/dom'd for the first time, and because I have thought that I am a dom at least since early teen age.

I think, for your definitions to apply one needs to be in a relationship, and within this relationship it is relatively easy to tell: this is top/bottom or slave/master.
But there is also a way to say: I'm dom or I'm a top, just on my own, and out of a relationship, as a self-definition, don't you think?

Bredon

 

[neonflux]

Your cat is so cuuuuuuuuute!

Mastre said i culd tell u thanks fur bot uv us
Our slav is hlping me to writ tis but i dn't think sheese a gud speller

Thank you! i'm convinced this is what they'd say if they could type, lol - the other one is sitting on top of my monitor right now, LOL ~ kitty slave