quote:

ORIGINAL: Lockit

I believe it exists. Whether it is successful or not may depend on the dominant. I see many try, in different ways. Many that aren't even in a relationship yet, will try to manipulate as well. Another persons manipulation cannot be called a lack in a dominant unless that manipulation is successful. Sincerity does play a part and so does personal honor, honesty and how little or how much 'game' we allow ourselves. If someone doesn't honor themselves, they may try to play others. They may set the stage for something to happen, hoping for a certain outcome. This can be motivated by good things too... but often isn't.

In my relationships it is agreed that I am in charge of our direction and if they are doing things that directly influence the direction they want to take and it is common... I look at myself and then I look at them. If I don't feel I am at fault and I am very willing to admit my fault... then we have something to look at. Rarely does someone go too far with me and rarely would I allow them to. Yet, some try.

I saw the other thread. Am I trying to excuse my lacks by blaming another person? I don't believe I do that. I may in some way, have done that at some point, somewhere in time, but I don't believe I live that way and am pretty honest with myself, about myself and brutal when I have had to be. I suppose it could be both ways, in that one is blaming another and there is a lack somewhere in someone or the relationship, but for me... I don't think that is the case, nor for my partners. Some that were newer to me did try though and it had nothing to do with my dominance unless I didn't feel we were ready for full on dominance and they were trying to push into it. It didn't work and I walked away. I don't play that way. Communication works far better than manipulation.

Sometimes there have been situations where I viewed something that I thought was one thing or another and was wrong. Therefore, I discus it with my partner and we get it sorted out. If it continues to be a problem, then I would consider it might be what I thought it was to start with. Whatever topic it is that might be misunderstood or need attention. That includes manipulation or giving direction. Most often, when topping is mentioned in my relationships, it has been in joking or has been taken very patiently with a question that points out what I am seeing and maybe someone ought to think about that just a bit. [;)]

I think a black and white answer without area's for variance, might be a little too black and white.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChatteParfaitt

Yeah, I don't like the black and white response to this issue either. However, to give the other poster some creds, there are many desktop doms or new doms or just not very good doms (take your pick) who *DO* call everything topping from the bottom, b/c they know subs don't want to do that, and they *DO* want to keep the sub down emotionally, stifle them, keep them from asking too many questions, keep their ego down, whatever, again take your pick. So I know this does exist.

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

I partly agree and partly disagree with IrishMist on this.

I think it certainly does exist. I've seen bazillions of instances of what I'd describe as topping from the bottom. My definition isn't pejorative - to me topping from the bottom is simply the act of the sub controlling or influencing the scene. It's not necessarily bad, but sure - sometimes I do wonder "who is the Dominant in that relationship...?"

quote:

ORIGINAL: PetiteOralSub

Does it Exist?
Holy Moly!
It is more common place than not from my experience thus far.
Everytime a sub shows attitude, attempts to manipulate, pouts, insists on negotiations and safewords with one who is supposedly her Master,
not her top or her domly sort of boyfriend, her Master;
you have a 'master' bottoming from the top and a sub topping from the bottom.
Most modern people do not have the emotional courage that it takes to consistently enforce, live and breath the M/s structure.
These Masters are rare, it takes intelligence, dilligence and self-discipline.

Most of the profiles I have read on cm are not lifestyle -- they are bedrom tops and bedroom bottoms -- kinky folk trying to get laid -- so does it really matter anyway?
It only matters in M/s and O/p where the participants are trying to live within a mutually comfortable structure with definition and consequence.

quote:

ORIGINAL: slaveluci

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

I partly agree and partly disagree with IrishMist on this.

I think it certainly does exist. I've seen bazillions of instances of what I'd describe as topping from the bottom. My definition isn't pejorative - to me topping from the bottom is simply the act of the sub controlling or influencing the scene. It's not necessarily bad, but sure - sometimes I do wonder "who is the Dominant in that relationship...?"

Interesting answer and I highlighted something that jumped out at me here. Going along with what I posted above, "controlling" and "influencing" are two very, very different actions to me. As I said, I can always ask Master for anything. I may or may not get it. The fact that I asked may "influence" His decision but it in NO WAY "controls" it. That, to me, is the crux of the whole "topping from the bottom" question. Him considering my request and perhaps even being influenced by my desires - while both of us are fully aware that He has the ultimate decision-making authority - is not at all the same as being "controlled" or "topped" by me into doing my will against His own..........luci

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml



Thanks for picking up on this - especially the "controlling or influencing" bit - you're right, there is a very big difference between the two, and my personal tendency would be to allow (occasionally) my sub to influence me - but to draw the line very clearly at "control".

Thanks for making me think a little more about it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChatteParfaitt

I needed some time to think about your response, Irish, b/c so much of it I agree with, but then so much of it I disagree with.

It's nothing more than simple manipulation on both sides...and there is nothing wrong with that.

I agree with this. The term manipulation has been given a bad rap, but everyone is manipulative in their relationships to *some* extent. And most successful dominants I've seen are very manipulative, but in a good way, if that makes sense. So I don't see being manipulative as necessarily bad, even if it's emotionally manipulative. Where the line gets crossed is when someone uses emotional blackmail.

Since I don't want to spend too much time defining the phrase or arguing semantics, I am going to give an example from my own life.

I've been with the man for about 14 years now, off and on, with one time being "off" for about 4 years. But we have lived together that entire time. About a year into things I started lobbying for a dog (we already had 2 cats).

I've been both a dog and cat owner my entire life, I've never been this long without a dog. Having a dog is as much a part of life to me as having a cat. The man, however, doesn't like dogs nearly as much, and doesn't want one.

So this was a real issue for us. Not one we argued about, BTW, I learned early on, he doesn't argue.

But one I kept lobbying for. Everything from sending him pics of cute lil puppies, visiting them at the pet store, talking to mutual friends who had puppies, you get it. All (somewhat) emotionally manipulative things, as he loves me and wants me to be happy.

A bit toppy, since I didn't just take no for an answer and initiated many, many discussions about the topic. Eventually I noticed when he said, "No, we will not be getting a puppy," that I really should back off. This was not his stern voice, more a flat unemotional voice.

Now, the only thing I didn't do was actually get a puppy and bring it home. That to me would be crossing the line from being emotionally manipulative to topping from the bottom. B/c now he would have to make a decision. Give in to me and have me think him a wimp, or be the bad guy and make me take the puppy back.

He would hate either option. I think he would have made me take it back (he knows he can't give in to me on the stuff he really cares about), and that would not have merely made him angry. Remember that flat unemotional voice? It means he needs to take an emotional step back from me. This is not a good thing.

So I think I skirt that toppy line pretty often w/o every crossing over where I know I shouldn't, b/c I've learned over time that when it comes to what really matters to him, for the health of our relationship, I really mustn't push it.

Obviously different doms draw that line in the sand for different reasons. But I see topping from the bottom as continually wanting to push that line, and never learning when to just back off and let the issue go.

Now I will lobby hard for what I want, I admit this, but I *am* capable of learning when to just stop. And the longer we are together the better I am at this.

HHmm...so...did I define the line between garden variety emotional manipulation to get something you really really want (but don't need), and topping from the bottom?