Printable View
Debate time?
Ok...I need someone to explain....why is it when a submissive gets a little ornery they are accused to topping from the bottom?
Maybe, I need someone to explain..what exactly is Topping from the bottom?
And what's wrong with a sub being ornery?
Didn't this come up once before?
I'm a little unclear on the phrase "topping from the bottom", though I've read it before. I don't understand exactly what it means, or whether it's good or bad, or why. Shouldn't a sub have the right to some control over the situation?
hmmm...when i think of topping from the bottom, i think of a submissive trying to manipulate her Dom or the situation to her liking. now i know a lot of subs are sitting there saying "oh no! i'd never try to manipulate him!" and i'm in that same boat...i would never INTENTIONALLY manipulate him. but sometimes we do it without realizing what we are doing.
i don't consider being ornery as topping from the bottom. i just consider it to be...well...ornery! lol and hell we all get ornery from time to time! ~smiles~
Ornery, and topping from the bottom would differ only in intent. They could be the same act.
For instance, if you are topping from the bottom by controlling the actions, rather than submitting to them. Versus you are ornery by trying to egg the Dominant on.
Least thats my view
I've always grew up to understanding orneriness to meaning playful and being silly. Now, I do have this side to me. I love to laugh. I say quick witted things just to get and quick response from Master. It's usually a swat. I love it. Sometimes, I need to feel him, others I need the domination.
Is this topping from the bottom?
In some thread some where I read where a sub teased her Master by masterbating in the hallway of their apartment. The Master was talking to a guest and from where he was sitting the the room he had perfect view of her but the other person did not. Later he punished her for being naughty (playfully I beleive) but in response to his post some said his sub was topping from the bottome.....why? Why couldn't this be looked upon as orneriness, or playfulness by the sub?
Is this topping from the bottom?
One night I decided I was tired of being up on the back burner where my ex was concerned. I knelt in front of him, explained how I needed him and loved him. He walked away....I lost my temper from the rejection and we had a yelling match.
Is this topping from the bottom?
I mean, I am careful with how I do things so as to NOT top from the bottom. One thing I love about my Master is that he likes my playful side and doesn't mind my "orneriness". I hate when someone from outside says "she tops from the bottom". I know Master will have his say if I cross the line. So, why is it, that others think they have the right to say or judge..who is topping from the bottom?
Master's disarray Grace
No, thats playfulQuote:
Originally Posted by Talia
No this is also playfulQuote:
Originally Posted by Talia
it could have been, depending on your intent...Quote:
Originally Posted by Talia
Its all perspective.Quote:
Originally Posted by Talia
Hi Talia,
I think it sounds more like your playful, perhaps even a little saucy/cheeky (in the best of ways), for the most part. If your Master appreciates all these qualities about you, that's all that matters.
Some Dom/mes would not want their subs to have any of these traits, and others endear it as it seems your Master does. Personally, I think it's sexy and playful and hope that any man I'm with would appreciate it as well. Whether sub or not, it's fun to turn our partners on (looking at the example of the woman masterbating where only her Master could see her)
My understanding of "Topping from the bottom" is that of Hellish's- manipulating a situation, but not always ill intended. It's a Subs job to be open and honest with a Dom/me, and that means telling them specific things, but say you mention that you'd love to be randomly taken in the doorway (bear with my poor example!)... I think topping from the bottom would come into play if you said two days later "tonights a good night to take me in the doorway", or behaving poorly to try and manipulate some punishment to take place in the doorway (you see here why my doorway example is poor! lol but I'm going with it) I think that's more of a clear example of a manipulative intent as opposed to innocent.
Cariad- Very funny!!!!!! Good work.
ID- Would you mind elaborating on:
I ask because I think this is a really good example of a situation where fine lines exist as to whether it's considered topping from the bottom.Quote:
Originally Posted by IDCrewDawg
Thanks Talia- this is always an interesting topic of discussion/education to me.
Well I feel that since she was attempting to get her partner to Dominate her, even as much as he may wanted to, as a Dominant if he didn't want to, and she had persisted to the point he relented and did as she wanted. It could be seen as topping from the bottom because she controlled the dominant.
I feel topping from the bottom is done with ill intent, the submissive looking to undermine the Dom. If that isn't the intent, then it doesn't fall into the category of topping from the bottom.
But thats just my view.
Can a strong Dom be "topped from the bottom"? I mean, doesn't the Dom have to allow it for it to occur? - for the sub to have more control than the Dom wishes? I'm sure many would say I top from the bottom because I let my desires be known. But my Dom encourages this communication, so is it really topping since it is within the parameters set by my Dom? I don't think so.
fantassy
No fantassy, your situation I don't believe is topping from the bottom.
Can a strong dom be topped from the bottom. Given the right circumstances. Perhaps, I don't know, since I have never met this type of Dom.
Thanks for elaborating.Quote:
Originally Posted by IDCrewDawg
This is where I get confused on the fine line issue- why is expressing one's needs if they're not being met, even using persistence, topping from the bottom? I get it in theory, particularly because you explained it well. What I don't get is why it's more than having a discussion that turns into an argument where someone tries to...well, for lack of a better word, win? I'm probably missing something here though, or maybe because I've never brought d/s outside of a bedroom my approach to a discussion would be different?
I think including ill-intent in your definition of TFTB is an important association because there is a negative connotation to TFTB, so a negative (ill-intent) should be included, also making it less encompassing.
I think everyone has hit on a portion of the problem of defining "topping from the bottom." Because there are some many variables in a D/s or BDSM relationship, one all encompassing definition is almost impossible to find. First and foremost I would think that it depends on the roles that the persons in the relationship have defined for themselves. Is it a D/s relationship, Master/slave, Top/Bottom relationship? Within the scope of those definitions, what limits are in play, what relational rules, what parameters on roles have been negotiated? In the end, I think that the definition of "topping from the bottom" is slightly different in every relationship.
In general I would offer that any time a sub or a bottom goes outside the defined and negotiated limits or parameters of his or her role to attempt to maneuver or manipulate the dominant partner in the relationship into performing in a certain way, it is easily defined as "topping from the bottom." Now, it can be done playfully, spitefully or even maliciously. My personal feeling is that when it is done playfully it is almost a normal part of the relationship. Every person has wants, needs, desires and fantasies that they want to see fulfilled It is natural for them to try make this happen. Its natural.
On the other hand, if it is done spitefully or maliciously, it is a dangerous and detrimental act that threatens the D/s or BDSM relationship. It becomes an issue of control and can escalate into and open struggle for dominance in the relationship. I have seen some self confessed subs who do everything in their power to manage and control the entire relationship from the bottom side.
Thats my take on this question. (Kicks his soapbox back under the table)
TDS
My two cents is that people who are into topping from the bottom are completly different people than are into plain old D/s. I don't think it's a sexual flavour or something to spice up the life with. At least this is my experience.
Personally, it's not my cup of tea. Unquestioning obedience gets me a hard on. Opinionated wise-asses don't.
I read something from an article at www.differentequals.com and had saved it a while ago. The title of the article was "topping from the bottom vs. inspiration." It definitely echoes what DeSade states above.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDeSade
"Is it a Dominant's job to make you submit? - Or to inspire you to submit? Let's flip the concept around: Is it a submissive's job to make someone Dominate? - Or to inspire them to Dominate?
The answer is obvious. But, obvious or not, many people never internalize it. When a submissive "tops from the bottom" the line between "making" and "inspiring" has been crossed - And the reason that stinks has little to do with D/s and much to do with consensuality.
Put the Dominant hat on and it becomes even clearer. If I make someone submit... it's non-consensual.
By contrast, "inspiring" not only confers consent. It also confers pride. And pride has everything to do with D/s.
If you accept that a submissive's duty is to make her Dominant proud - Then you must inspire Her to Dominate.
I quite like this line of reasoning. It seems appropriate to Me that both the Dominant and submissive are bound by a shared rule of conduct. It also seems to articulate the notion that submissives have a duty to inspire."
(i highlited that part...)
Isn't it all about communicating needs, understanding the relationship you have with your partner, sometimes testing those boundaries but ultimately, taking responsibility - and accepting the consequences - for your actions within that relationship?
Everyone has had some great input and it's wonderful to read different perspectives!
Thank you ID and Desade for your imput...
What I had intended was something anything....not dominnation, initially....but something to show he still loved me, an I love you back would have been nice but instead he walks away from me. Im on my knees baring my soul to him...open and raw. He walks awayQuote:
IDCrewDawg Well I feel that since she was attempting to get her partner to Dominate her, even as much as he may wanted to, as a Dominant if he didn't want to, and she had persisted to the point he relented and did as she wanted. It could be seen as topping from the bottom because she controlled the dominant.
I feel topping from the bottom is done with ill intent, the submissive looking to undermine the Dom. If that isn't the intent, then it doesn't fall into the category of topping from the bottom.
I took the first step to kneel at his feet and tell him I love him.....He walks away.....Did I persist...not at first...I went and cried...for hours...then I approached him...Just asking him why he doesn't love me...he said he did....but just laid on the bed and ignored me. I think that's what pushed me over the top...being ignored.
So...are you saying topping from the bottom isn't always negative?Quote:
In general I would offer that any time a sub or a bottom goes outside the defined and negotiated limits or parameters of his or her role to attempt to maneuver or manipulate the dominant partner in the relationship into performing in a certain way, it is easily defined as "topping from the bottom." Now, it can be done playfully, spitefully or even maliciously. My personal feeling is that when it is done playfully it is almost a normal part of the relationship. Every person has wants, needs, desires and fantasies that they want to see fulfilled It is natural for them to try make this happen. Its natural.
TDS
I think this is where the problem of if it is a good or bad think to top from the bottom really lies.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDeSade
I have known someone also who wanted to manage and control the entire situation. Didn't work and was very short lived.
I wouldn't consider another such situation even if only online. No way.
Ohhh Talia - I didn't realize when you started the post that you were thinking of something specific. I hope you find the answers you're looking for... and a resolution with Him...Quote:
Originally Posted by Talia
take care....
You seem to have a pretty clear idea of what "topping from the bottom" is... could you define it or explain it to me? 'Cuz honestly, I have no idea what this phrase means, and it seems like even most people who use it aren't totally clear themselves.Quote:
Originally Posted by TomOfSweden
This question also goes to anyone else who has a definite idea of the meaning. Tom's post just caught my eye especially.
From what I learned topping from the bottom implies that the submissive or slave is trying to dominate the situation in a less domineering matter. The sub or slave may try to push the Domme to do something she isn't comfortable with. Other examples could be the sub or slave trying to persuade the Domme risk her life, go against her integrity, make insincere promises, and selfish intentions. You have to be careful for guys like that. They are usually easy to spot but some are getting smarter. Follow your intuition!
It's when the sub tells the Dom what she/he wants to be done to her and the Master complys. For me domination is what is happening in the head. Whether we feel dominated or not, and not linked to who has the actual power. In any consensual relationship, power is equal because both parties know that the other will leave if they don't comply to their partners needs. It's the same deal with subs topping from the bottom. In this definition topping from the bottom is still the sub being dominated.Quote:
Originally Posted by NatalieD
It's the kind of sex, (safe and sane) people have at BDSM clubs with new people, for a number of very obvious reasons. A standard Master/slave relationship needs to be built over time where the Master gradually knows which buttons to be pushed, preferably in a sober state. It needs very good comunication. Clubs don't provide these factors, (time and sobriety). Some subs are really into it but aren't for some reason willing to find a Master, (I can think of a million various reasons).
I've got a classic example. At last Rubberball a couple of months ago a friend of mine got picked up by a girl. She told him she needed whiping and she pulled him by his tie to the cross where she told him and me to tie her to it. She was very clear on that she wanted my friend and not me to whip her and she kept egging him on saying more and more all the time, until she was satisfied when she told him to stop. After which she said thanks, left us and went to join her company again. My friend was just the vessel holding the whip. At no point did his opinions come into play. But he didn't mind. The girl had a great ass!!!
But as I said earlier. In my opinion it's not a phase in a relationship, a flavour or some degree of slaviness. It's what people are into or aren't. Some slaves are really control-freaky and will not under any circumstances hand over power. I don't see them as worse slaves, just different, (having another Master than me!!!).
This is off-course my defintion. I'm sure someone else has a different one.
It appears to me that there are as many definitions of orneriness and toping from the bottom as there are couples engaging in the activities. What one may consider topping from the bottom another may look at as orneriness. What works for each couple I believe is the important issue.
If the Dom accepts the orneriness as just that and possibly lets it influence how he deals with his sub it appears to me that would be the ideal situation in that instance. However if the reverse were true and he resented the implication of the orneriness then he may, in fact, consider the same act as trying to top from the bottom.
Whatever works for each couple is how it should be played IMO.
Talia, it sounds like this is a relationship problem, not a D/s problem.
I agree with a lot of what others have said--topping from the bottom, for whatever reason, is when the sub takes control of the situation. Maybe misbehaving to earn a "punishment" (presumably something fun). There is indeed a fine line between being playful and being manipulative, and I suppose it's different for every couple.
Had you met him at the door, on your knees, begging to play, he might have ignored you just to tease you or to reassert his power (we'll play when I say so).
But unless I misunderstand the situation, you weren't asking to play. You were asking for something you need in your relationship, and I think regardless of your power dynamic, it's a request he must take seriously. Personally, I don't think it's acceptable for a person to be cruel in a relationship just because they're the "top."
well put, TDS.
It was a relationship problem..and I have divorced him...not because of this but because of a multitude of reasons....it was an example someone had once told me I was topping from the bottom....Which I disagreed to because all I wanted was him to love me...anyway...Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue_Monday
Regardless of what "topping from the bottom" means to each of us..it does seem manipulation seems to be at the top of the list....
Once, I was in trouble with Master and Sir reminded me I needed to remind Master I still needed punishment. Personally, viewed this as "topping from the bottom". One, I figured Master would remember on his one, on his own time. Two, I felt telling him expecting him right then to punish me was topping.....I asked Sir his view when i asked him if this could be considered "topping". He explained...."If Master tells you to not do this and you do it anyway, that's topping from the bottom. You are reminding him....that's all." (paraphrasing)
Your views.......
My views is that a slave can only top from the bottom if the Master wants the slave to. If your master tells you not to do something and you do it anyway, I wouldn't call that D/s at all. That's just an ordinary vanilla relationship.Quote:
Originally Posted by Talia