RE: Are many submissives really bottoms?

RE: Are many submissives really bottoms? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Submissive

Message

StellaByStarlite -> RE: Are many submissives really bottoms? (3/20/2007 7:18:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Celeste43 Not all play is painplay. I'm a bondage bottom and submissive to one but no interest in pain. To further blur definitions.. I don't get physically aroused by pain at all, but my owner is a sadist, so I participate in painplay for his pleasure. Would that make me a bottom, then? lol

Mercnbeth -> RE: Are many submissives really bottoms? (3/20/2007 7:33:14 AM)
quote: I would like to hear some comments on what people here feel are the differences between being a submissive and a bottom. The difference? You can spank a bottom, but before you spank a submissive you have to make sure spanking is within his/her limits and stop if they mutter their 'safe-word'.

IrishMist -> RE: Are many submissives really bottoms? (3/20/2007 7:37:08 AM)
quote: The difference? You can spank a bottom, but before you spank a submissive you have to make sure spanking is within his/her limits and stop if they mutter their 'safe-word'. Ok. That got a huge chuckle out of me [8D]

cloudboy -> RE: Are many submissives really bottoms? (3/20/2007 8:05:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael I think some people have trouble in relationships because judgemental assholes whine and snivel that they aren't "right" because they don't identify the way they feel they should. The want to cram everyone into tiny boxes as it satisfies their need to control everyone around them. Almost 2/3 of the problems in relationships that I saw while I was active in the scene had, as a major component, an issue with roles/labels and other preconcieved thoughts. If more people just let go and dealt with the human in front of them than the label, real or imagined, things would be vastly better. Yes fuck them all-- the artsy posers, the office blowhards and brown nosers; Fuck the type who gets the job done and the type who stands on principle; the down-to-earth and understated; the overhyped and underrated; Project director? Get a bullshit detector. Client's mum? Up your bum. You can't be nice to everyone. When your back is against the wall When they don't return your call When you're sick of saving face When you're screwed in any case Fuck culture scanners, contest winners, subtle thinkers and the hacks who offend them; people who give catered dinners and (saddest of sinners) the sheep who attend them-- which is to say fuck yourself and the person you were: polite and mature, a trooper for good. The beauty is they'll soon forget you and if they don't the probably should. ---Deborah Garrison, From A WORKING GIRL CAN'T WIN

boundkitty -> RE: Are many submissives really bottoms? (3/20/2007 2:40:08 PM)
Wow. This has been a really interesting thread. Y'all have given me a lot to think about and I thank you for it. boundkitty

raevnn -> RE: Are many submissives really bottoms? (3/20/2007 2:54:09 PM)
In my opinion: a bottom wants to get hurt, played with or laid and wants to be in control of how all of that happens. They control the situation and they make the rules. a submissive, while they may get pleasure out of the end result, is doing whatever they do in order to please another person. a slave is a submissive person who's been properly 'mastered.' None of that is to say one is greater than the others or better than or a step beyond - they're all different, have different qualities, and can be mixed and mingled to suit different people... in my opinion, of course :)

daddysliloneds -> RE: Are many submissives really bottoms? (3/20/2007 3:00:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: fiddlegirl Hi VeryMercurial. I'm one of those who identify as a bottom rather than submissive. This is because my overall goal in play is to please myself, i.e., to experience the feelings that I enjoy. I think it's just great that my tops also enjoy inflicting those feelings... but from my perspective, their pleasure is a fringe benefit, not the source of my pleasure. I think for a submissive it's the other way around... pleasing the dominant is the goal, and their own pleasure is the fringe benefit. But I think it's a misconception that top/bottom play is synonymous with "kinky sex". For me, it's about pain... actually, one of my tops is a man who I never have sex with (I'm queer). We don't think of the pain play as being foreplay... or as being service... it's just good clean fun, eh? Fiddlegirl and there you go; one of the best explanations ever! my profile states quite frankly that i'm a submissive(to a select few), bottom (to all others), masochist... when i'm bottoming, i'm going into things pretty selfishly, though i do make sure that i get with a compatable top to ensure that our wants/needs/desires are being mutually satisfied ... when i'm submitting to someone, i'm yielding to their will with all selfishness aside.

fiddlegirl -> RE: Are many submissives really bottoms? (3/20/2007 3:45:01 PM)
Re: "when i'm bottoming, i'm going into things pretty selfishly, though i do make sure that i get with a compatable top to ensure that our wants/needs/desires are being mutually satisfied ... " Good point Daddyslittleoneds (and I'm glad you liked my explanation). Often on Collarme I've seen the expression "do-me sub" or the implication that kinky bottoms are just selfish jerks. I think you can be selfish without being a jerk - and a key strategy for that is to find tops with complementary desires, rather than trying to pester someone incompatible into topping you. Another thing is to be a good sport about doing things to accomodate your top even if they aren't your cup of tea (assuming that they're not extremely objectionable to you either). For example, wearing a collar and leash doesn't do anything for me, but I'm game for wearing them if my top likes that - doesn't do me any harm, so why not go along with it? But again, I wouldn't call that submission, because I'm going along to be a good sport and because they make similar concessions to my preferences, not because I have a burning desire to please them. I don't doubt that there are kinky bottoms who also happen to be selfish jerks - and I know many female doms on CM have encountered guys who DO pester them to do stuff that's only fun for the guy. But wanting to play the way you want to play doesn't inherently make you a selfish jerk - if it did, wouldn't all the doms be selfish jerks too? Raevnn said:"a bottom wants to get hurt, played with or laid and wants to be in control of how all of that happens. They control the situation and they make the rules. " Not sure I agree with the second sentence here. When I'm playing with a top, both of us have complete veto power, and nothing happens unless we both agree to it. By my math, that means we have equal control... in theory, anyway. In practice, the person with the narrower limits is going to be using that veto more often and will appear to be in control - but that could be either the top or bottom. I loved your concluding statement, though, Raevnn, and I don't think it can be pointed out often enough... Cheers, Fiddlegirl

sleazybutterfly -> RE: Are many submissives really bottoms? (3/20/2007 4:13:55 PM)
I suppose there are plenty of them out there. I run into an issue sometimes where my Master is more of a Top, than a dominant. We have worked through this, but it still causes issues once in a while. I don't get as much control taken as I would like, or the discipline...but we have worked out a balance of sorts. I know that a great deal of the subs I talk to are more bottoms, but they feel like it's not okay to admit it (I assume that's why they don't). I am not fond of labels anyway, so I guess to each their own.

raevnn -> RE: Are many submissives really bottoms? (3/20/2007 4:31:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: fiddlegirl .... Raevnn said:"a bottom wants to get hurt, played with or laid and wants to be in control of how all of that happens. They control the situation and they make the rules. " Not sure I agree with the second sentence here. When I'm playing with a top, both of us have complete veto power, and nothing happens unless we both agree to it. By my math, that means we have equal control... in theory, anyway. In practice, the person with the narrower limits is going to be using that veto more often and will appear to be in control - but that could be either the top or bottom. I loved your concluding statement, though, Raevnn, and I don't think it can be pointed out often enough... Cheers, Fiddlegirl I only meant that as a contrast - submissives don't usually/necessarily control some of the situation whereas bottoms do. I never meant to say that the top was just out there, willy nilly, doing whatever they were told - they certainly have control of their part of it! :)

jaunty1 -> RE: Are many submissives really bottoms? (3/20/2007 5:33:22 PM)
Differences in being a submissive and a bottom. I personally, view them as pretty much the same with just a subtle difference; a bottom is only submissive as long as the scene lasts. A submissive can be submissive for as long as the relationship lasts, or until they no longer wish to be so. Live well, Alex

SimplyMichael -> RE: Are many submissives really bottoms? (3/20/2007 9:20:55 PM)
Alex, In my mind, that is how I think of the division. In real life a bottom could simply be a submissive who hasn't met the right dominant and a submissive could be someone who hasn't yet gained the emotional strength to choose to be a bottom. It could also be someone who spent time being a slave who would put many to shame and decided they were happier being a bottom. Many gay men play as bottoms and some of the most well trained and beautiful acts of submission I have been lucky enough to witness were by men who proudly called themselves "bottoms."

Celeste43 -> RE: Are many submissives really bottoms? (3/21/2007 7:50:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: StellaByStarlite To further blur definitions.. I don't get physically aroused by pain at all, but my owner is a sadist, so I participate in painplay for his pleasure. Would that make me a bottom, then? lol Actually Stella, that makes you submissive. You submit to something you don't like because you want him to be happy. And that's about the best definition of a sub I'll ever come up with.

KatyLied -> RE: Are many submissives really bottoms? (3/21/2007 7:54:20 AM)
quote: a slave is a submissive person who's been properly 'mastered.' ::insert eye rolley here::

IrishMist -> RE: Are many submissives really bottoms? (3/21/2007 7:56:37 AM)
quote: a slave is a submissive person who's been properly 'mastered.' /snort you have to be kidding, right?

SmackNMe -> RE: Are many submissives really bottoms? (3/21/2007 10:22:17 AM)
yes subbies are bottoms/dominants for sexual times only though.

raevnn -> RE: Are many submissives really bottoms? (3/22/2007 3:18:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: IrishMist quote: a slave is a submissive person who's been properly 'mastered.' /snort you have to be kidding, right? You might wish to have your sinuses checked - allergies are bad in the spring. It's an opinion - a slave is not a slave unless they're owned, mastered? misteress'ed? Please pick a term you like... or, you can dally about snorting. It makes no difference to me. :)

xxxWENCHxxx -> RE: Are many submissives really bottoms? (3/22/2007 4:17:43 PM)
Well ... this thread certainly has been a learning experience .... and since i am still learning (even at my age, yes) and (no offense) all those opinions made my head spin ( Y'A/all couldn't help it ... lol ), i took it upon myself to look up a few "terms" .... this learning experience just does not end ... so i thank Y/you all for debating this as it did teach me a lot today .... and here is what i found at http://www.bdsm-education.com/dictionary.html * bottom- A term used for most that "play" in the submissive role. Gives up control but only for the play time. * Top- A term used for most that "play" in the Dom/me role. The one that controls things but only for the play time. * Topping from the bottom- Where the sub directs the Top what to do or how to do things to them. * Top's disease- Where one believes they are dominant and superior to every one. A state of self-delusion. ====== * Owner- A term used for those that “live” as an Owner of their property (sub). * Master/Mistress- A title/term for those that "live" as a Dom/me. Webster's- A man who rules others or has control over something. ====== * TPE- Total Power Exchange (usually no safewords used, usually those 24/7). Considered negotiated codependence. * TPT- Total Power Transfer. The sub transfers the power/authority to the Dom/me. After the starting out negotiations, negotiation does not occur very often if at all. Similar to internal enslavement. * True/Real Dom/me/Top/Master/Mistress- It has nothing to do with quality and technical knowledge doesn't make for experienced. To call oneself true/real implies that any other form of dominance is less or false. There is no right or wrong way to be a Dom/me/Top/Master/Mistress, it depends on the desires of those involved. * True/Real sub/slave/bottom- It has nothing to do with quality and technical knowledge doesn't make for experienced. To call oneself true/real implies that any other form of submission is less or false. There is no right or wrong way to be a sub/slave/bottom, it depends on the desires of those involved. * True submission (also called sub heart)- It is an art. It goes far beyond just serving, being trained, punished or rewarded. You immerse yourself as deeply as you can into being controlled by your Dom/me. It is mental, spiritual, and physical, not just a means to arousal. You lose ability to do anything but obey--auto responsive. {{ okay ... i learned i am my Master's true slave ... before i was just a slave and it is a TPE dynamic ..... should anyone wish to know }}

VeryMercurial -> RE: Are many submissives really bottoms? (3/22/2007 5:55:59 PM)
Thanks for the terminology, there certainly is a difference in most folks minds between a bottom and a submissive.

privatelyseeking -> RE: Are many submissives really bottoms? (3/22/2007 8:35:47 PM)
[/quote] hello for myself, a bottom is someone who only submits during a specified time of 'play'. Submissive however, is a personality trait, something that someone has all the time. Of course, this is just how I view things; others will of course think differently. melissa [/quote] imho this is it exactly. A submissive is a strong person, with limits. Setting limits is healthy and smart, and should be done at all times. Negotiating, either in a D/s relationship, or a scene does not make one weak as a Dom/me or a Sub. It makes them SMART!

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875