The Topping From the Bottom Poll

[MechaBlade]

You can't do anything from the bottom if you're not a Bottom and e's not a Top.

 

[FurryFury]

You can't do anything from the bottom if you're not a Bottom and e's not a Top.

That's what I think. I do think I am a bottom though. Just because I have to be in charge of "everything" in my everyday life and sometimes top him doesn't mean I'm not!

Yesterday was our 14th Wedding Anniversary (16 years if you count living together) and it was damned good!

Fury

 

[leeroy jenkins]

That's what I think. I do think I am a bottom though. Just because I have to be in charge of "everything" in my everyday life and sometimes top him doesn't mean I'm not!

Yesterday was our 14th Wedding Anniversary (16 years if you count living together) and it was damned good!

Fury

Congratz to you then Fury. You do realize that top and bottom are talking about phyiscal position right?? It almost sounds like your using top and bottom to describe domainance and submission.

 

[MechaBlade]

That's what I think. I do think I am a bottom though. Just because I have to be in charge of "everything" in my everyday life and sometimes top him doesn't mean I'm not!

Yesterday was our 14th Wedding Anniversary (16 years if you count living together) and it was damned good!

Fury

congrats. To be a fly on the wall that night...

 

[the captians wench]

That's what I think. I do think I am a bottom though. Just because I have to be in charge of "everything" in my everyday life and sometimes top him doesn't mean I'm not!

Yesterday was our 14th Wedding Anniversary (16 years if you count living together) and it was damned good!

Fury

Congrats Fury!

I'm not sure what my opion on this is yet..... I'll think on it.

 

[FurryFury]

Congratz to you then Fury. You do realize that top and bottom are talking about phyiscal position right?? It almost sounds like your using top and bottom to describe domainance and submission.

Thanks!

Actually my understanding is that you can top someone or bottom to someone and not necessary be Dominant or submissive. I am not talking positions here. I am talking about screening. In my relationship, my husband and I both feel submissive sexually speaking. He may top me from time to time (Thank GOD!!!) but he is not dominant in the bedroom. I may top him sometimes but that doesn't make me dominant. Since neither of us is willing to claim the Dominant role as theirs, I use the terms Topping and bottoming.

This thread was started to ask one simple yet difficult question because I'd been accused of topping from the bottom. If one isn't in a D/s relationship can you do that? Now the person who repeatedly accused me of this used that term because, I suspect it is on the biggest "sins" on this board and because that person didn't want to refer to me as submissive. That person if I'm correct believes a bottom is something less than a submissive (and had recently been disappointed by someone who claimed to be submissive but in his view this person let him down by being merely a bottom) but anyway that is the history.

It's evolved into a thread that has helped me and hopefully others ask and answer a lot of questions.

Now when I first started tasting D/s, Power exchange and BDSM, I didn't know if I were Dominant, Switch or Submissive. Now I feel I do know but when someone says something to me, I like to check what others are thinking, again.

Feel free to discuss any or all of the ideas in this post or on this thread. I love discussion.

Fury

congrats. To be a fly on the wall that night...

Thanks MechaBlade!

It was a very, very good night!!!

Soon I'll be off on a romantic / kinky trip to celebrate this even more! I'm making my list and checking it twice right now.

Fury

Congrats Fury!

I'm not sure what my opion on this is yet..... I'll think on it.

Thanks!

I'll be glad to hear what you think when you decide!

Fury

 

[babiesmiles]

That's what I think. I do think I am a bottom though. Just because I have to be in charge of "everything" in my everyday life and sometimes top him doesn't mean I'm not!

Yesterday was our 14th Wedding Anniversary (16 years if you count living together) and it was damned good!

Fury

Congratulations *hugs *

 

[babiesmiles]

You can't do anything from the bottom if you're not a Bottom and e's not a Top.

Exactly my thought as well

 

[FurryFury]

Congratulations *hugs *

Thanks!

Fury

 

[Shankara20]

Thanks!

Actually my understanding is that you can top someone or bottom to someone and not necessary be Dominant or submissive. I am not talking positions here. I am talking about screening. In my relationship, my husband and I both feel submissive sexually speaking. He may top me from time to time (Thank GOD!!!) but he is not dominant in the bedroom. I may top him sometimes but that doesn't make me dominant. Since neither of us is willing to claim the Dominant role as theirs, I use the terms Topping and bottoming.

........

Fury

word words words....

I started as a sub, I still remember the flogging session where, as it ended, I heard my mind say "I want to learn how to use that - how to give someone the pleasure I feel right now" I wanted to give someone pleasure by flogging them, so who truly is serving the other? As I grew in BDSM I found, for me, I could not use Dom and sub to define my relationships. Top and bottom worked better. I now call myself a switch, but am willing to bottom to only a select few - and no one in my life right now. So I am a Top - I guess.

In a play session who is doing the work? who is keeping the space safe? who responds to safewords? who checks in with whom? who sets limits? who is responsible for the well-being of whom? who it the Top? who is the bottom? who is giving? who is receiving?

I find the discussion about how people define themselves interesting, but feel that self-defining is what it is about.


Ps - congrats and to you both....

 

[FurryFury]

word words words....

I started as a sub, I still remember the flogging session where, as it ended, I heard my mind say "I want to learn how to use that - how to give someone the pleasure I feel right now" I wanted to give someone pleasure by flogging them, so who truly is serving the other? As I grew in BDSM I found, for me, I could not use Dom and sub to define my relationships. Top and bottom worked better. I now call myself a switch, but am willing to bottom to only a select few - and no one in my life right now. So I am a Top - I guess.

In a play session who is doing the work? who is keeping the space safe? who responds to safewords? who checks in with whom? who sets limits? who is responsible for the well-being of whom? who it the Top? who is the bottom? who is giving? who is receiving?

I find the discussion about how people define themselves interesting, but feel that self-defining is what it is about.


Ps - congrats and to you both....

Thanks HOT stuff!

I know just what you mean too!

Fury

 

[leeroy jenkins]

word words words....

I started as a sub, I still remember the flogging session where, as it ended, I heard my mind say "I want to learn how to use that - how to give someone the pleasure I feel right now" I wanted to give someone pleasure by flogging them, so who truly is serving the other? As I grew in BDSM I found, for me, I could not use Dom and sub to define my relationships. Top and bottom worked better. I now call myself a switch, but am willing to bottom to only a select few - and no one in my life right now. So I am a Top - I guess.

In a play session who is doing the work? who is keeping the space safe? who responds to safewords? who checks in with whom? who sets limits? who is responsible for the well-being of whom? who it the Top? who is the bottom? who is giving? who is receiving?

I find the discussion about how people define themselves interesting, but feel that self-defining is what it is about.


Ps - congrats and to you both....

Well if your playing with adults, then your both equally responsible unless maybe one of you is inexperienced. A top should not shoulder all the burden of making a scene as safe as possible its not fair to them. Just like a bottom should let the top know if they are reaching their limits.

The point of playing is for each partner to get something out of the experience and to have fun, if you don't share responsibility then it could lessen the enjoyment from playing together and know one wants that.

 

[Shankara20]

Well if your playing with adults, then your both equally responsible unless maybe one of you is inexperienced. A top should not shoulder all the burden of making a scene as safe as possible its not fair to them. Just like a bottom should let the top know if they are reaching their limits.

The point of playing is for each partner to get something out of the experience and to have fun, if you don't share responsibility then it could lessen the enjoyment from playing together and know one wants that.

when I Top I want to take responsibility for the safety. I want to be able to monitor bottom's place - I want that control to help give them the best experience they can have - I want them to be able to let go, to give to me there protection, to surrender and drop all the resistance to the total feeling available to them in that moment. I want them to know and trust that I understand the limits of the scene, that the use of safeword is for safety and not scene direction. I what to be able to checkin with them without bringing them out of what-ever-place-they-are-in, I want them to forget time and space and place. I want them to forget we are two and feel we are one.

I did not mean to convey in my last post that I resent any of those I do when I Top to my bottom - when I serve my bottom, when my bottom gives me that time and place to do my will in serving them - I do not want them running the scene while in the scene (safety and hard limits aside).

Ideally, once all the pre-scene communications are done with, I want bottom to trust me - to allow me to do whatever my will - and I want to be adept at my craft so that that trust is well placed.

As I suppose you can see from this post, it is all my "I wants" that makes me Top - yes?

It feels powerful inside me to feel a bit of arrogance, a bit of "be my bottom once and you will want Me to be your Top" I have a hell of a lot I'd better know and a hell of a lot I'd better be able to do and had better be good at relating to people and must be humble just enough to be able to learn from every experience I'm in to pull that off. I'm not there, yet - but I am much closer than I was 11 years ago.

And when scene starts I want bottom to have no question that I can pull off all that bullshit I just typed - alt least for what we agreed we were about to do.

 

[Netzach]

You also do run into the situation of being with a bottom who is a "flyer" - who goes deep and euphoric and isn't capable of making safe decisions, responsible adulthood notwithstanding. I get like this in rope, which is why I like to be rope-topped by my submissives - I trust them to do only what I want when I'm past the point of being able to manage.

 

[Shankara20]

You also do run into the situation of being with a bottom who is a "flyer" - who goes deep and euphoric and isn't capable of making safe decisions, responsible adulthood notwithstanding. I get like this in rope, which is why I like to be rope-topped by my submissives - I trust them to do only what I want when I'm past the point of being able to manage.

I know what you mean. It is Tops responsibility to know the signs and manage that.

Very early in my experience I was the bottom in a Japanese suspension demo. It was for a ProDomme I had just been introduced to (not as a client). At the practice session days before the class we agreed to test the demo. She had 3 other Pro's and hung me naked in exquisite red japanese rope. I was dropping into deep sub space as I just hung there, she saw it and without so much as a change in her voice as she was discussing the class with her friends she placed her hand on my leg and never let go - moving it ever so slightly to keep just enough of me in the room to do our business and so I could realize that not only did I have wrists and ankles but I that could relate what was going on with them.

PS - as a sub I can be a "flyer"

rope *sigh* mmmmmmmmmmmmm

 

[Pure]

hi furry,

i don't think you should begin the investigation with the idea there is a 'sin' in "topping from the bottom." i say this despite many claims to that effect.

IMO, it's good to know what one is doing. If you don't, you're deceiving yourself or being foolish or ignorant. For instance, if you address teens with the word "kids," applied to them, it may well offend them. if you keep calling them "kids" simply because you're unaware of the insult, you're foolish or maybe ignorant of how most teens feel, i.e., as 'young adults' or maybe 'youth.'

SO if someon says he 'tops' his partners, and someone else says she 'bottoms', either one may be mistaken. They may be ignorant, but there is no sin in their doing whatever it is they do. There is no 'sin' in doing something self taught, by way of dancing; but if one calls it 'ballet dance', one may be mistaken.

AS a couple posters have said, the one who is "topping," is by definition, running the scene or encounter: i.e., he or she is actint as the prime determiner of what occurs. If there is perfect pre agreement and/or preplanning, then the 'topping' issue becomes moot--no answer is possible. Both want X--to fuck hanging from the chandelier--and they do it. No 'topping' has occured, and certainly not because one was physically uppermost in respect to the chandelier!

So furry, going by your examples, there is some 'topping' by you, going on (sometimes) in that by direct or indirect means you're getting hubby to do what you want. Paradoxically, what you want is for *him* to take charge.

This is a common paradox, i.e., how does a parent encourage a teen to be "Independent"? The usual [and mostly correct, IMO] answer is that there is no direct way: if the parent plans, say, for the teen to endure unpleasant consequence, of for the teen to choose where s/he works for the summer, the parent is still in charge.

In your tricky situation, I think there is no direct way to, as it were, create a 'topping' situation. Many wives have posted on this; many have tried, but come up against the paradox I described: if YOU plan for someone to take charge, then likely you remain 'in charge' when the person does what you want, even if it's to spank you.

In one way, then, I agree with Netzach. you're not 'topping from the bottom' but I add that it's no sin whatever you two do. you may be be 'topping', of course, at least in certain cases. And i don't think the prospects are good for changing that. (there being of course, no need to).

so that's my opinion.

 

[chris9]

Pure, with the same logic one can also say that when Fury does Domly things to her husband, because he wants her to, then she is in fact 'bottoming', 'submitting' to his desires. Just carrying the logic a bit further. And confusing myself

Fury, I think noone but you can say *what* you are. You can be a switchy submissive, a submissive top, or a bottoming Dominant. It's how you define yourself. If you feel you are a submissive deep inside, then you are. Topping now and then doesn't change that, no matter how much you are enjoying that. I find it quite arrogant if someone wants to tell you who you are.

 

[Pure]

yep, Chris,

C: Pure, with the same logic one can also say that when Fury does Domly things to her husband, because he wants her to, then she is in fact 'bottoming',

if hubby's wants are the [added: active and]primary determinant in an encounter, [added: and he is seeing to it that they are such], then he is topping. but my impression based on ff's account is that her wants are primary. she is, as i said, trying to cultivate and encourage certain wants, but as i proposed in my analogy, if you "manage" and "orchestrate" your teen's independence, then it doesn't (yet, at least) really exist; you are still in charge.

---
BTW, I am NOT saying 'what ff is.' I object to all talk of 'doms' 'subs' and 'switches', PYL's and pyl's, as stereotypical and misguided, in general. I simply try to understand behavior--who is doing what to whom. Notice I generally spoke of 'topping', the activity, not someone's *being* a top.

 

[FurryFury]

I know what you mean. It is Tops responsibility to know the signs and manage that.

Very early in my experience I was the bottom in a Japanese suspension demo. It was for a ProDomme I had just been introduced to (not as a client). At the practice session days before the class we agreed to test the demo. She had 3 other Pro's and hung me naked in exquisite red japanese rope. I was dropping into deep sub space as I just hung there, she saw it and without so much as a change in her voice as she was discussing the class with her friends she placed her hand on my leg and never let go - moving it ever so slightly to keep just enough of me in the room to do our business and so I could realize that not only did I have wrists and ankles but I that could relate what was going on with them.

PS - as a sub I can be a "flyer"

rope *sigh* mmmmmmmmmmmmm

*sings*

"I believe I can fly! Think about it every day!"

I do hope the person designated as the one in charge of the scene is being careful, watching for important signs in the potential flyer and following safety protocols now matter what the two people call or label themselves.

I totally understand that the person being done unto does bear some responsibility still to communicate but damn that sux! Wouldn't it be just fucking GREAT to be able to trust and JUST LET GO??? For once? Yeah!

Fury

hi furry,

i don't think you should begin the investigation with the idea there is a 'sin' in "topping from the bottom." i say this despite many claims to that effect.

IMO, it's good to know what one is doing. If you don't, you're deceiving yourself or being foolish or ignorant. For instance, if you address teens with the word "kids," applied to them, it may well offend them. if you keep calling them "kids" simply because you're unaware of the insult, you're foolish or maybe ignorant of how most teens feel, i.e., as 'young adults' or maybe 'youth.'

SO if someon says he 'tops' his partners, and someone else says she 'bottoms', either one may be mistaken. They may be ignorant, but there is no sin in their doing whatever it is they do. There is no 'sin' in doing something self taught, by way of dancing; but if one calls it 'ballet dance', one may be mistaken.

AS a couple posters have said, the one who is "topping," is by definition, running the scene or encounter: i.e., he or she is actint as the prime determiner of what occurs. If there is perfect pre agreement and/or preplanning, then the 'topping' issue becomes moot--no answer is possible. Both want X--to fuck hanging from the chandelier--and they do it. No 'topping' has occured, and certainly not because one was physically uppermost in respect to the chandelier!

So furry, going by your examples, there is some 'topping' by you, going on (sometimes) in that by direct or indirect means you're getting hubby to do what you want. Paradoxically, what you want is for *him* to take charge.

This is a common paradox, i.e., how does a parent encourage a teen to be "Independent"? The usual [and mostly correct, IMO] answer is that there is no direct way: if the parent plans, say, for the teen to endure unpleasant consequence, of for the teen to choose where s/he works for the summer, the parent is still in charge.

In your tricky situation, I think there is no direct way to, as it were, create a 'topping' situation. Many wives have posted on this; many have tried, but come up against the paradox I described: if YOU plan for someone to take charge, then likely you remain 'in charge' when the person does what you want, even if it's to spank you.

In one way, then, I agree with Netzach. you're not 'topping from the bottom' but I add that it's no sin whatever you two do. you may be be 'topping', of course, at least in certain cases. And i don't think the prospects are good for changing that. (there being of course, no need to).

so that's my opinion.

Thanks for your thoughts Pure!

You are always a deep thinker and it's good to hear your ideas on this subject.

I will say this, lately, since our get away in January, he has been taking charge a LOT more without any prompting from me. He has seemed to enjoy it more and feel less guilty about it. I feel like I haven't switched nearly enough to "pay him back" but I've been taking a back seat and REALLY enjoying him driving the bus!!!

Fury

Pure, with the same logic one can also say that when Fury does Domly things to her husband, because he wants her to, then she is in fact 'bottoming', 'submitting' to his desires. Just carrying the logic a bit further. And confusing myself

Fury, I think noone but you can say *what* you are. You can be a switchy submissive, a submissive top, or a bottoming Dominant. It's how you define yourself. If you feel you are a submissive deep inside, then you are. Topping now and then doesn't change that, no matter how much you are enjoying that. I find it quite arrogant if someone wants to tell you who you are.

I think this person wasn't being arrogant so much as confused by some of the things I've written about what I enjoyed and have done. I can see how that could happen very easily.

I do feel that I am what I feel I am. *nods a lot*

*hugs*

Fury

 

[siren319]

That's what I think. I do think I am a bottom though. Just because I have to be in charge of "everything" in my everyday life and sometimes top him doesn't mean I'm not!

Yesterday was our 14th Wedding Anniversary (16 years if you count living together) and it was damned good!

Fury

I do the same thing, I am completely bottom but I am sure someone always has to be in control. If the Top is lagging, or seems to be losing control I just step up because if he doesn't have it, someone has to.

 

[the captians wench]

Okay, I've put some serious thought into this, no one faint now, and I think I've come up with an opionion. Topping is a verb, the action to top, which is a position but is some times used to refure to the more dominate of the participants involved. To have a top in this senerio one would almost deffinitly have to have a bottom. But these two terms are both very broad terms used by many in many different ways. If you do not consider yourself to be a bottom then there can be no place to top from by way the question is frazed. Then again, if he doesn't consider himself a top, then there is no one to try and go over so to speak. So if you're no bottom, and he's no top then to top from the bottem would be impossible because there is no bottom or top. You're just two people having fun and that's how it should be


have I made any since at all? I tried really hard this time and my head hurts.

 

[chris9]

BTW, I am NOT saying 'what ff is.' I object to all talk of 'doms' 'subs' and 'switches', PYL's and pyl's, as stereotypical and misguided, in general. I simply try to understand behavior--who is doing what to whom. Notice I generally spoke of 'topping', the activity, not someone's *being* a top.

The second part of my post was not directed at you, or saying you say 'what ff is'. I did not understand your post as if you were doing so. It was some general thoughts to the question asked by

Today someone told me I was a switch. I can and do switch but I don't feel I am a switch. Hmm. Of course I feel it would be okay to be one, that isn't my issue. My issue is I feel deep down inside I am to my core submissive.

What do y'all think?

I think this person wasn't being arrogant so much as confused by some of the things I've written about what I enjoyed and have done. I can see how that could happen very easily.

If one tries to put others into any categories, yes, it's hard to place you. And after Pure's post and my continuation of his thoughts confusing me a lot, it's not to be wondered at. I did not mean to offend or insult anyone.
It seems to be worth much that not liking labels is so very popular around here. Trying to label oneself is hard, but trying to label others is close to impossible.

 

[Pure]

to clarify (?)

hi chris,

there are a couple qualifications I should have added

C: Pure, with the same logic one can also say that when Fury does Domly things to her husband, because he wants her to, then she is in fact 'bottoming',

new form:
Pure's sentence revised: if hubby's wants are the [added: active and] primary determinant in an encounter, [added: and he is seeing to it that they are such], then he is topping.

P: Your example is unclear on a couple points. If he is saying "these are my wants" and you are to meet them, and she accedes --be it whatever role, e.g., whipping or being whipped-- then his wants are, as I said, the primary determinant and further they are actively promoted.

The question for 'topping' is 'who is in charge' or 'who's calling the shots' *and this can only be the case if the two persons are opering on an agreement that essentially puts them both--i.e. jointly-- (in which case, one may equally well say, 'no one is in charge').

It's in fact a tricky question, just as it's hard to see, in a couple, who is 'in charge'.

Looking at a variant of your example: My dog, when hungry, starts sniffing around the floor, looking for crumbs. If I see that, i feed him. In a sense then, his desires have 'called the shot,' since he's fed accordingly.

If Furry simply notices or knows hubby wants something, such as a dish of ice cream, and she decides to get it for him, it looks as if his wants are determining what happens, and in a sense they are.

In a larger sense, however, something else *may* be happening, as one sees played out in the sitcoms, like "Raymond." IF one partner has a plan to get what she (for example) wants, such as for example a new car, she may decide to cater to the other, to 'butter him up', and even 'serve' him before he asks. But in fact, she is in charge. AS is the farmer in 'fattening the goose,' in the classic tales.

Arguably I'm in charge of the dog, too, since I've decided and committed to look after him so he has a good life. Given that's my plan, I feed by a schedule, but also I look for signs of hunger, and when I see them, I almost always feed him. So, in the terms I've added at the beginning, his desires do determine things, but not because they are actively asserted. I'm observing them, and in fact it's my active choice to act on the observation, i.e., meet that want.

There, clear as mud!

 

[Shankara20]

and my head hurts.

want some Icy Hot?

 

[chris9]

Sorry, Pure, I think I'm too tired to be understanding much of this. I'll try again tomorrow, if I manage to keep my eyes open after the exam to read anything (not likely ) Or I come back saturday. I feel like I could understand something and actually agree. Not now though. Good night.