WHO'S ON TOP?

Copyright 1998, by

Stuart Norman

There is an ongoing discussion in the SM community about the difference between top - dominant and bottom - submissive. In many cases these terms are used interchangeably. Aside from the definition of top/bottom existing in the larger gay community of penetrator and penetratee, the gay male SM subculture tends to use the terms top/bottom, while the hetero SM subculture uses dominant/submissive in most cases for the same meaning. However, there may be more than subtle differences in thinking between the two subcultures and even within them. If we analyze the terms, there are significant differences in meaning. I hope to clear up the confusion and add definition to the terms.

An SM top is one who supplies action; a bottom is the receiver of the action. Neither of these need be dominant or submissive. We all know of cases of "topping from the bottom," in which the bottom is in control of the scene, not the top. This may be the case in which a novice top is directed by and learns from an experienced bottom or it may the case of the proverbial "pushy bottom" who cannot give up control or there can be mutual scenes in which neither desires to dominate/submit, but to act and be acted upon. So who is dominant and submissive in these cases? On the other hand, dominance means control, submission means giving up control; the implication is that the dominant is active while the submissive is passive. There is a dynamic of power in this relationship that is absent in the aforementioned pure definition of top/bottom, but is nevertheless usually associated with these terms. Certainly it is possible and perhaps desirable in an SM scene for the top to be dominant and the bottom to be submissive. A dominant wants to take control, wants the submissive to submit to hir control, the submissive wants to give upself-control and be controlled. But not all bottoms want to give up all self-control; they want some specific actions performed on their bodies. In traditional SM theory, the bottom "controls" the scene by having the right to set limits that the top must not transgress. The bottom does not totally submit, as would a slave, so the top cannot totally dominate. Tops want to perform some specific actions on bottoms bodies, bottoms want to receive some specific actions. Therefore, negotiation prior to a scene is required so that each knows the others' needs and limits. However, a submissive gets off on being controlled; hir concern is not for specific actions to be performed on hir body. The obverse is relevant for the dominant. No actions, practices or techniques, i.e., bondage, whipping/flogging, various stimulations or sensory deprivations, that are usually associated with SM need apply to pure dominance/submission. For after all, dominance/submission occurs in everyday life in many forms and to varying degrees, well outside the narrow confines, interests and practices of SM afficionados.

The foregoing may be distributed and published freely only if in full. But please feel free to criticize and/or expand upon my discussion. Ideas are not copywritable, only my specific exposition of them. But I don't wish them to be taken out of the context in which I wrote them.