Thought provoking conversation as an introduction

Thought provoking conversation as an introduction (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

SirSvafnir -> Thought provoking conversation as an introduction (4/9/2009 3:01:26 PM)
Well as this it My first post on this board I thought that I would make it an intrigueing one as a way of introducing Myself. So while I pondered what to write I recalled an artical that I recently read which I found very enlightening. The following is taken from that article which also can be read in it entirety at: http://www.literotica.com/stories/showstory.php?id=316064. Everyone has heard of "topping from the bottom" where a submissive takes control of the scene by making her desires the primary objective. Dominants learn of this online, long before they realize it is happening to them. The problem with this behavior is that it reduces the emotional link between the Dominant and the submissive because it erodes the roles and responsibilities of each partner in the D/s relationship. The question therefore is; is there an opposite of Topping from the bottom, and if so what is it? Before you read further, let the question play in your mind for a while and try to define for yourself what that would be, then compare it (or debate it) with My opinion and let U/us all learn from each other.

SimplyMichael -> RE: Thought provoking conversation as an introduction (4/9/2009 3:06:12 PM)
Here is something to think about. Do you normally walk into a room and tell everyone you are going to educate them?

LadyPact -> RE: Thought provoking conversation as an introduction (4/9/2009 3:10:06 PM)
Dominants learn of this online, long before they realize it is happening to them. You assume that everyone comes into this via the net? Well. I've been educated. LOL.

littlewonder -> RE: Thought provoking conversation as an introduction (4/9/2009 3:13:48 PM)
Once again..there's no such thing as topping from the bottom. If she's topping then you're allowing it. As for the rest of what you said... Yes there is definitely bottoming from the top and it's extremely annoying. I tend to walk away when from such men since I quickly and completely lose interest in them. If I wanted to top a man I would have turned Domme.

N4SDChastity -> RE: Thought provoking conversation as an introduction (4/9/2009 3:20:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael Do you normally walk into a room and tell everyone you are going to educate them? See, I dint get that vibe. Seemed like he proposed entering in to an intriguing conversation. So, the opposite of BFTT (bottoming from the top, natch) would be TFTB, I assume. (I dint bother reading the article... I'm waaaaaaaaaaaaay too smart for that [8\|]) Kinda sorta seems like an so-called Dom(me) who would isn't rilly a Dom(me) at all but a (possibly) secret-sub. Maybe should have their whip & paddle debit card revoked... Turn in their handcuffs... Kneel, and... well... blow me[:)] Just my $0.02

N4SDChastity -> RE: Thought provoking conversation as an introduction (4/9/2009 3:29:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: littlewonder Once again..there's no such thing as topping from the bottom. If she's topping then you're allowing it. I have a different opinion. Each of us has a desired outcome, given a specific set of circumstances. Someone with submissive tendencies may also happen to rilly, RILLY like getting their widdle-biddy bottom spankedified. Given a generic scene, such a sub may begin to misbehave in such a way as to bring about that desired result. A relationship of a suitable length allows each partner to learn, to some degree, the other partners responses to certain stimuli. Anyone with children, or, lucid enough to remember their own childhood, KNOWS how to manipulate, recognize manipulation, and, realize that sometimes you allow the other person their occassional "victory." To do otherwise eventually stiffles growth. Nobody in their right mind want emotionally stunted children, or emotionally suppressed subs. Well, maybe you would want en emotionally supressed sub, but you'd eventually end up taking them back to the sub-store as defective, and exchanging it for a new one[:D]. I am NOW in for $0.04...

subtee -> RE: Thought provoking conversation as an introduction (4/9/2009 3:42:21 PM)
Passive-aggressiveness. If you look it up, there's a picture of my ex: "The Creature."

Mercnbeth -> RE: Thought provoking conversation as an introduction (4/9/2009 3:59:05 PM)
quote: The question therefore is; is there an opposite of Topping from the bottom Svafnir, Yes there is - the 'do me dom'. You know, the one who tells their submissive to 'entertain' them by having them provide ways they will submit; or sends them out on the internet or at clubs to "find me another sub!" Illustrated in the official BDSM manual by a picture of a person spread eagle on a feather bed with the balloon caption reading - 'Do-ME!' Welcome to CM - Good luck!

RedMagic1 -> RE: Thought provoking conversation as an introduction (4/9/2009 4:04:11 PM)
Bottoming from the top ~ giving orders without taking responsibility.

catize -> RE: Thought provoking conversation as an introduction (4/9/2009 6:02:55 PM)
Both dominants in my life are interested in the primary goal of mutual pleasure. As the illustration used in the article, my enjoyment is their cup of great coffee (and dessert!) after dinner. Give it any stupid, derogatory, one true way catchy name you want. We are having a wonderful time!

N4SDChastity -> RE: Thought provoking conversation as an introduction (4/9/2009 6:07:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic1 Bottoming from the top ~ giving orders without taking responsibility. So, you posit that bottoms/subs/slaves are not able, or, not expected to have/exhibit responsibility? Admittedly, responsibility does not ALWAYS come with adulthood and, even when it does, it sometimes comes as a very late onset, still, are not grown folk supposed to be responsible for their actions/decisions? Denying responsibility is really only within oneself, I fully believe. Denial does not actually absolve one from being responsible for their choice(s). Oh, wait, this is America (well, where the servers are hosted is, anyway). I can just sue someone if my decision to spank someone until they bleed goes horribly, horribly wrong. How DARE they LET me do that to them!!! My, now, $0.06... Of course, I realize that I am only serving to further the discussion, not actually providing any meaningful content.

RedMagic1 -> RE: Thought provoking conversation as an introduction (4/9/2009 6:12:02 PM)
Oh please. Anyone who reads my posts knows that I think everyone who does anything should be responsible for it. The point behind "topping from the bottom" as a negative thing is that the person who has agreed to take on a sub role is not holding up responsibility for that role, but is trying to do something else instead. Same thing here -- passive aggressive, as subtee put it. I'll tell you what to do, but I won't accept any consequences for your actions or mine.

dreamerdreaming -> RE: Thought provoking conversation as an introduction (4/9/2009 6:15:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: N4SDChastity quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic1 Bottoming from the top ~ giving orders without taking responsibility. So, you posit that bottoms/subs/slaves are not able, or, not expected to have/exhibit responsibility? Huh? That's not what RedMagic1 said at all. Edited to add: Nevermind, I see you've figured that out (below). To the OP: Welcome to the boards. Everyone will always agree with your sweeping generalizations. giggles

N4SDChastity -> RE: Thought provoking conversation as an introduction (4/9/2009 6:17:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic1 Oh please. Anyone who reads my posts knows that I think everyone who does anything should be responsible for it. ~ Same thing here -- passive aggressive, as subtee put it. I'll tell you what to do, but I won't accept any consequences for your actions or mine. Ahhh!!! I stand enlightened as to your position. With apologies. I do not visit the forums much. Just pos in, infrequently, annoy, and fade into the woodwork.

TreasureKY -> RE: Thought provoking conversation as an introduction (4/9/2009 6:45:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic1 Bottoming from the top ~ giving orders without taking responsibility. Hmmm... I'd call that just simply irresponsible topping. To me, bottoming from the top would be a dominant who delegated away *all* decision making... i.e., "you (said to sub) pick a place to eat, decide what I'm going to wear, make sure the bills get paid, plan our scening, select what to feed me, choose where we live, etc., etc., etc." ... to the point where they are no longer responsible for anything. Erm... okay, so maybe that's what you meant by not taking responsibility. [:)] Note that I'm not referring to a dominant who wisely delegates some authority to his sub, but withholds (and periodically exercises) his right to have final say on any decisions. There is a fine line of distinction there. [;)]

MsDDom -> RE: Thought provoking conversation as an introduction (4/9/2009 9:32:01 PM)
quote: Everyone has heard of "topping from the bottom" where a submissive takes control of the scene by making her desires the primary objective. Dominants learn of this online, long before they realize it is happening to them. The problem with this behavior is that it reduces the emotional link between the Dominant and the submissive because it erodes the roles and responsibilities of each partner in the D/s relationship. The question therefore is; is there an opposite of Topping from the bottom, and if so what is it? Before you read further, let the question play in your mind for a while and try to define for yourself what that would be, then compare it (or debate it) with My opinion and let U/us all learn from each other. some didnt understand that the above was the excerpt from the article--which i just felt the author went on and on trying to make sure the reader get what "topping from the bottom" was and why he is apposed to it (my analysis). i disagree w/ him saying this happens (topping) b/c a Dom/me doesnt lead properly...it could happen purely b/c the Dom/me desires it--lets it happen or possibly instructs the sub to do so. in my opinion i dont think there is an opposited to topping, in the physycal since...maybe symantics (bottom from top). would not the opposite be exactly what a Dom/me is...a top and the sub is...a bottom? [8\|]

chiaThePet -> RE: Thought provoking conversation as an introduction (4/9/2009 9:57:34 PM)
Sometimes SimplyMichael, you move me. Sometimes. OP, I find trying to put my tops on from the bottom, an unsatisfying and uninspiring waste of energy. chia* (the pet)

catize -> RE: Thought provoking conversation as an introduction (4/9/2009 10:06:14 PM)
quote: some didnt understand that the above was the excerpt from the article--which i just felt the author went on and on trying to make sure the reader get what "topping from the bottom" was and why he is apposed to it (my analysis). i disagree w/ him saying this happens (topping) b/c a Dom/me doesnt lead properly...it could happen purely b/c the Dom/me desires it--lets it happen or possibly instructs the sub to do so. Agreed! I also had a problem that the author of the cited article had a domly epiphany, but it doesn’t appear that he asked his submissive if that is how she saw things. He presents an assumption as fact. I don’t take on the responsibility for every disappointment my dominant faces. There are times when I may disappoint him; but sometimes that has more to do with his unrealistic expectations rather than any real failure on my part.

heartcream -> RE: Thought provoking conversation as an introduction (4/9/2009 10:24:43 PM)
Darn, I thought this was going to be about thought provoking discussions as an introduction of one person to another but that isnt really the meaning of these words here. If it were I would agree thought provoking discussions can be a lovely way to begin an introduction between two beings.

DomineK -> RE: Thought provoking conversation as an introduction (4/9/2009 10:46:23 PM)
The opposite of topping from the bottom is bottoming from the top. I think it does happen more often than talked about. There are a fair number of dominants who, in their desire to woo new partners or gain security, modify their dominance to fit predominantly what they expect their partner might enjoy/want. In terms of a Top/Bottom relationship, it's not as big of an issue. When it comes to a D/s relationship, however, the dominant is probably not doing themselves nor their submissive a favor by catering to their sole pleasure. This is part of the reason I hesitate to play or pursue people that are very new to the lifestyle. I sometimes feel like I am too much or too mean or too (fill in the blank) and try to tone it down to the point of catering to only the things I know they like. It's fine to a point and in a casual friendship-but it leads nowhere positive for anything longer term (in my experience) once the habit of a slave getting what they want all the time is established. I imagine that if someone was very into the s-side of the D/s equation, having a dominant that "bottomed from the top" would be extremely frustrating. --on an aside, I didn't find his tone insulting nor trying to "educate"

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625