LesbianWhy the hell do some trans-focused "lesbian" communities talk about being a "top" or "bottom"?

submitted by reluctant_commenter from self.LGBDropTheT

Can anyone explain this to me? I am assuming the concept is somehow derived from the "top/bottom" terms that gay men use. Do any L/B women actually use this term to describe their same-sex sexual activity...? Sounds to me like just a bunch of sex stereotypes, where the "top" is the "man" in the relationship and the "bottom" (who is often shamed or put down) is the "woman", in manner that mimics BDSM dominant/submissive roles. I don't get it. What does this have to do with being lesbian?

TLDR is this a real thing for lesbians (and/or bisexual women in same-sex relationships) or is this just more bullshit that transgender ideology pushes?

Example: https://old.reddit.com/r/actuallesbians/comments/kujw0p/sorry_i_dont_speak_bottom_two_slides/

all 71 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]Smolders1Cock is god's greatest gift. 33 insightful - 7 fun33 insightful - 6 fun34 insightful - 7 fun -  (0 children)

They’ll never have lesbian sexual intercourse (or any sort of intercourse in general), so it’s safe to assume their knowledge of the act is limited, stereotypical and ridiculous.

[–]Mandarz11 33 insightful - 4 fun33 insightful - 3 fun34 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

I keep seeing this pop up on LGBT subs recently and I’m siding with the trans ideology or people who fantasize about wlw relationships. r/AL has posts weekly from people asking if they sound more like a top or bottom, like it’s just another label to add to their Twitter bio.

Came out 10 years ago as a lesbian, turned 30 this year and can’t think of a fellow gay lady who uses this. Generally been pretty open to discussing sex topics with my friends. I’ve joked with an ex that she was a pillow queen but that was after we learned the phrase from watching, “The L Word”.

[–]reluctant_commenter[S] 19 insightful - 1 fun19 insightful - 0 fun20 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

like it’s just another label to add to their Twitter bio.

Lol, that makes a lot of sense. Collect 'em all!

Thanks for sharing your experience, I appreciate it. I am still in the closet and very private about my sexual history so I don't talk about this stuff with anyone IRL, helpful to hear I'm not the only one who hasn't heard any other gay women use these terms.

[–]Three_oneFourWanted for thought crimes in countless ideologies 27 insightful - 1 fun27 insightful - 0 fun28 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Huh? The top in a gay relationship is the one who uses his penis to penetrate the other, so how tf does that work without a penis? The only situation I can think of is with a strapon? But I doubt that's as popular among lesbians as anal sex is among gay men.

Are they refering to dom/sub? Because that's something else entirely that has nothing to do with penetration

[–]Elvira95Viva la figa 29 insightful - 2 fun29 insightful - 1 fun30 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

They use it as dom and sub.But even then I don' think there is strict dom and sub in most lesbian couples.These people want everyone to fit into little boxes and see relationships as some power play. Disgusting

[–]reluctant_commenter[S] 22 insightful - 1 fun22 insightful - 0 fun23 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

But even then I don' think there is strict dom and sub in most lesbian couples.

Completely agree. The idea of seeing relationships solely through a power play lens disturbs me, as well.

[–]Three_oneFourWanted for thought crimes in countless ideologies 18 insightful - 3 fun18 insightful - 2 fun19 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

It's kind of ironic that for people who reject the idea that sex fits neatly into two boxes and a super tiny basket of oddities, they hate when personalities that actually do exist on a spectrum are difficult to keep track of

[–]reluctant_commenter[S] 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Huh? The top in a gay relationship is the one who uses his penis to penetrate the other, so how tf does that work without a penis?

I have no idea... that's what I don't understand. My only guesses are either a) transwomen who date biological straight/bisexual women say "top" to refer to the fact that they have a dick (i.e. heterosexual PIV or anal) and/or b) dom/sub just like you said.

[–]davids877Straight Male Man 20 insightful - 6 fun20 insightful - 5 fun21 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

That's not how this works, that's not how any of this works.

[–]OPPRESSED_REPTILIANIntersex male | GNC | Don't call me "a gay", "twink" or "queen" 21 insightful - 3 fun21 insightful - 2 fun22 insightful - 3 fun -  (7 children)

Because they are gay men using gay male terms... lol. I have seen a couple of lesbians use "top/bottom", but usually because they get it mixed up with "dominant/submissive." Top/bottom and dom/sub are two completely different things, however.

[–]reluctant_commenter[S] 20 insightful - 1 fun20 insightful - 0 fun21 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Because they are gay men using gay male terms... lol.

Most of them are "transbians" who in some shape or form want to date women or "women-identified" lesbians, though. Are you suggesting that they are gay men with autogynephilia? Or that they are just gay men LARPing as women who end up dating other gay men LARPing as women?

[–][deleted] 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I think there are gay men (I have no idea what number) who have AGP. They're attracted to men but also are attracted to themselves as women or something woman adjacent.

[–]reluctant_commenter[S] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I agree, I think so too! I was just curious because I wasn't sure what he meant.

Curious how many transwomen on AL this might characterize... Man, Blanchard's AGP/HSTS characterizations are super important for making heads or tails out of what we see here.

[–][deleted] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I understand that sexual orientation and paraphilias exist separately to each other, however I'm not sure why someone who is sexually attracted to men would have an inverted sexuality towards women.

[–]reluctant_commenter[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Like, what causes it? Well, it seems like there is some significant portion of genetic predisposition to paraphilias in general-- I would guess some gay men are much more or less predisposed than others. What environmental factor pulls the trigger on the loaded gun of genetics? Not sure...

[–][deleted] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yeah my money is on it being neurological too. However I'm uncertain how it fits in conceptually with the agp / hsts model which links transgender and sexuality.

[–]reluctant_commenter[S] 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Well, I think it might be like this.

  • Some boys/men are super feminine. They have a tough time fitting into the world around them because of it, and end up deciding that life would frankly be easier if they just changed a few things and lived appearing as a woman. It is not so hard to pass for them. Most of these men are homosexual but some could be "straight transsexual" or "bisexual transsexual" I guess. (Being GNC is correlated with being LGB)

  • Some boys/men are genetically predisposed to have or to develop paraphilias. Because most men are straight, most of these people will be straight, but of course a minority are GB men.

Does that sorta make sense? If you had a gay man with AGP then I suppose he is "homosexual transsexual" literally speaking, since he is homosexual and trans, but-- he might not match that profile at all, e.g. a gay man who is not very GNC and who has an inclination for paraphilias decides to transition later in life.

[–][deleted] 20 insightful - 1 fun20 insightful - 0 fun21 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Dom/sub... I read a Reddit thread where a young person discovered that they enjoyed an activity during sex, that was completely innocent and not at all atypical, and now they're dom and their partner is sub. BDSM is trendy, I guess. That's no good. (Not that I'm looking down on BDSM, just that if it's trendy, they probably won't internalize BDSM consent culture or technical knowledge about safer practices.)

BDSMers also use Top/Bottom terms, rarely as their BDSM role, but sometimes. Top is the active, giving partner, bottom is the receptive partner. So you can have a "Rope Top," who likes to tie with rope, or a "Rope Bottom" who likes to be tied. Top/bottom is usually concordant with Dom/Sub, the common roles, but not always... they love to play with words to keep their role personas intact. Plenty of "Doms" like getting beaten, for instance. Switch would be vers.

[–]reluctant_commenter[S] 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Fascinating. Sounds like this may be something borrowed from BDSM, then, as opposed to being borrowed from gay men.

[–][deleted] 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

It's a little cloudy. I think BDSM may have borrowed it from gay men first, specifically gay men into SM, back when it was called that. Then that was ported into the pansexual (all sexes, all attractions) BDSM community. If you're dying to know, I can ask around.

[–]reluctant_commenter[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Gotcha, thanks for clarifying! I am curious but no pressure :)

[–][deleted] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Well, I did some sleuthing, and nobody knows off the Top of their heads. I did find out there's a rather rich and diverse history of sadomasochism post WWII that's very interesting.

[–]reluctant_commenter[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Okay! No worries, thanks for asking.

[–]yousaythosethingsFind and Replace "gatekeeping" with "having boundaries" 16 insightful - 1 fun16 insightful - 0 fun17 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

My lesbian friend who has been out as gay for 10-15 years and who got a divorce last year and has re-entered the dating scene has been like "What is this new hellscape? What are people talking about when they're obsessing over people being tops or bottoms? In all of my relationships, we just take turns. We never used that language." Basically. And even worse, they type people based on style and appearance. Just another example of how genderists don't break binaries, they enforce old ones and create new ones. My straight friends' relationships are less gendered than this for Christ's sake.

[–]Elvira95Viva la figa 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Yeah, like I'm very short and petite and non masculine, they would target me as a bottom according to their retarded heteronormative view, in reality I definitely lean sexually dom, which means not top, as very glad in the passive role too, just I prefer being the one going first and staying more on top/in control. And I only being open to dildos if I were the one wearing them most of time lol But in general any lesbian relationship is pretty equal and mutual, there is no strict role. I would never want a relationship with a strict role, that's boring and abusive.

[–]yousaythosethingsFind and Replace "gatekeeping" with "having boundaries" 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I’m similar. Appearance wise I clearly fall into the femme category but sexually I like a mix of both being in control and my partner being in control, and in practice I lean more towards being in control more often than not. I’m not passive in the slightest, in any aspect of my life really. I like things equal and mutual, as you said, and I think with lesbians my age this is pretty standard. And this is enraging because in spite of all the shit we lesbians have to deal with, this lack of set roles is where things have been undeniably better for us than for straight women. Now they’re projecting roles on young lesbians that are worse than what my straight friends are dealing with.

[–]Elvira95Viva la figa 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Well, I would stay forever alone before settling for some dominant woman acting like the man in the relationship. Nothing more repulsive to me.

[–]yousaythosethingsFind and Replace "gatekeeping" with "having boundaries" 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Lol same. But I do mean it when I say even my straight female friends’ partners don’t “act like the man” in such an obnoxiously 1950s way. So it’s even worse than that.

[–]Elvira95Viva la figa 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's true. They're acting like a backward hetero couple, not even a normal hetero couple. Damn, why I'm not bisexual? or asexual who don't need a companion :( What a curse,girl. Being abnormal sucks.

[–]winterwillow 15 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 0 fun16 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Been in the community 15 years, never heard any lesbian use it, and hardly any gay men actually, i e never heard any of them go 'I' m such a top' like all the reddit memes. I've always seen it as gay male terms used for compatibility when it comes to sex, not something that's referred to in every day conversations.

Me personally, I see this push to not only use, but 'identify' with these terms as part of trying to create this 'cool girl lesbian'. (have you read the passage from Gone Girl by Gillian Flynn?) Someone who isn't interested in cishetero feminism or icky women's issues like sexual assault, someone who rather adopt gay male culture than cultivate their own, someone who might only sleep with women, but offers up pictures or accounts of how soft and uwu (or dirty and kinky) it is for men to enjoy so they aren't excluded, someone who spends way too much time making sure everyone knows they don't hate men, i e a lesbian that poses no threat, still dependent on male approval.

This of course includes chanting 'transwomen are women', and adopting these gay male terms, as to make sure that lesbian sex is viewed through a heteronormative lens, much like gay sex, where one is giving and the other receiving. Once this is done, it's no longer foremost about being a woman wanting to have sex with another woman, but a 'bottom' wanting to have sex with a 'top'. And how can you as a lesbian 'bottom' refuse to have sex with a lesbian 'top' just because 'she' has an 'organic strap-on'? (Or a gay 'top' refuse to have sex with a 'bottom' with a 'bonus hole' ?) Because remember no feminist analysis of material reality here, only queer theory please. So basically, being such a 'cool girl lesbian' means gaining male approval, but also losing the ability/words to say no to sex with men.

I wrote another comment on a post about AGB that the trans movement seems so eager to want to construct sex as 'a stick goes into a hole' no matter what sticks or holes you have between you, and someone answered that they are eager to do that because that's the only way they have a chance of participating. If sex is a whole body experience, than what do they have to offer?

[–]GoValidateYourselfuseful lesbian 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

This of course includes chanting 'transwomen are women', and adopting these gay male terms, as to make sure that lesbian sex is viewed through a heteronormative lens, much like gay sex, where one is giving and the other receiving. Once this is done, it's no longer foremost about being a woman wanting to have sex with another woman, but a 'bottom' wanting to have sex with a 'top'. And how can you as a lesbian 'bottom' refuse to have sex with a lesbian 'top' just because 'she' has an 'organic strap-on'? (Or a gay 'top' refuse to have sex with a 'bottom' with a 'bonus hole' ?) Because remember no feminist analysis of material reality here, only queer theory please. So basically, being such a 'cool girl lesbian' means gaining male approval, but also losing the ability/words to say no to sex with men.

Holy crap this is a phenomenal analysis of what's going on. So at its core it's the compartmentalization of the body (and of the mind), on par with postmodernists "deconstructing" biological sex into a Mr. Potato Dick fantasy that they need queer theory to explain? Deconstructing common sense ideas about sex, breaking it all apart, and reconstructing to fit the narrow worldview that is queer theory. Fascinating! But holy shit that is the definition of brainwashing. Breaking down someone's view of reality and forcibly reconstructing it. It's horrible.

[–]winterwillow 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Thank you! Re-reading my post, I'd like to emphazise that I didn't mean that one has to be a radical feminist unaffected by society's demands to be a 'good' lesbian. What I meant was that I see a push where especially lesbian but also gay, are more identities and labels, where the accepted way to express you're a lesbian is 'I wear flannel and listen to Girl in Red, I'm such a top', but you're not allowed to talk about what actually makes you lesbian, or the reality of being a homosexual woman, that's dated and uncool and 'terfy'. There's a huge body/mind disconnect going on where your sexuality isn't practice as much as performance in the postmodernist sense, filling the 'queer community' with heterosexual people, and making homosexual people feel like they're not 'gay' enough.

It's very troubling how they've hijacked our community and deconstructed language in order to try and create som queer utopia where sure people 'identify' as having a sexuality, but where biological sex aren't allowed to matter.

[–]yousaythosethingsFind and Replace "gatekeeping" with "having boundaries" 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

This analysis is dead-on and is a more elegant way to frame things I've been trying to communicate IRL with lesbian friends. I've made a lot of headway by pointing out how dystopian it is that we are not allowed to be openly homosexual or talk openly about the things that make us homosexual for fear of backlash from people within the LGBT "community" and ostracization by the organizations who claim to be looking out for us. That we always have to keep the door open and create the impression that we could be open to males. And that dating apps have as a default that we must accept males in our dating pool and how not only disrespectful it is, but how purposeful it is.

And of course without the performance of the forced made-up stereotypes you've mentioned, these gaytrenders have nothing else to base being a lesbian on.

[–]winterwillow 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thank you! I've been thinking a lot about the trans movement's view on sex and sexuality, hope it can be be useful in your IRL conversations.

That we always have to keep the door open and create the impression that we could be open to males. And that dating apps have as a default that we must accept males in our dating pool and how not only disrespectful it is, but how purposeful it is.

Exactly. This is something I've also thought about, the term 'genital preference', how it makes it sound like a mtf in wanting to date a lesbian stumbles on the last hurdle (sex) that up onto that point (dating, making out etc.) they're still in the running. Because saying you're only attracted to females, not someone's 'female gender identity' aren't allowed.

[–]reluctant_commenter[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

What I meant was that I see a push where especially lesbian but also gay, are more identities and labels, where the accepted way to express you're a lesbian is 'I wear flannel and listen to Girl in Red, I'm such a top', but you're not allowed to talk about what actually makes you lesbian, or the reality of being a homosexual woman, that's dated and uncool and 'terfy'.

Ugh, thank you. Thank you SO MUCH for putting this into words. This is exactly what my experience has been and it sickens me. If I try to talk about the homophobic remarks I've heard or about having been only attracted to girls and not men, nobody I've met IRL can relate, they just want to talk about stereotypes and "Ohh, does she listen to Girl in Red?! Oh, does she wear flannel?!" Straight people wear flannel all the time... The fetishization of being same-sex-attracted revolts me, and it's all over social media and I hear it in real life from many people I know. I'll just keep staying in my closet, thanks.

edit: a word

[–]blackrainbow 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Sex stereotypes once again

[–]blackrainbow 15 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 0 fun16 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I HATE THAT

[–]Elvira95Viva la figa 7 insightful - 4 fun7 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 4 fun -  (3 children)

So... sei una top o bottom? Scherzo, scherzo :D

[–]blackrainbow 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Guai a te 😂😂

[–]Elvira95Viva la figa 10 insightful - 7 fun10 insightful - 6 fun11 insightful - 7 fun -  (0 children)

Italians are good are three things: cooking, fashion and coping american bullshit lol

[–]Elvira95Viva la figa 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Comunque, mi piacerebbe parlare in privato. Un'amica lesbica italiana sarebbe comodo. In futuro probabilmente uscirò con ragazze straniere, ma la connessione con una nazionale è un altro livello (anche se ho trovato un'anima gemella nell'est europa ahahah). Bonus point:all'estero essere italiani rende più interessanti. La conquisti con un piatto di pasta :D

[–]Rosefield 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You answered the question yourself: because it's trans focused.

[–]PassionateIntensity 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's a thing (I hate) that has bled into lesbian spaces of late because of all the men and penis-loving women and yaoi fans colonizing it. Really young lesbians do tend to use it...because they have no RL lesbian friends and only an online community with no sense of history or our own terms. Every time I see it, I object to the usage, but I don't know if I'm making a dent.

[–]sadbihours 11 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

This is basically back to “who is the man in the relationship” of the old days.

[–]strictly 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (18 children)

I have assumed they are using new terms to refer to whether they prefer receiving or giving regarding oral sex etc. Most like both giving and receiving though even if they have might like one thing more than the other. Those who only like receiving or giving are quite rare (pillow princesses and stones) but not unheard of. I'm a stone so I have to be open about that when dating as that is not what most women are looking for. I have no desire to shame or put down anyone though, I'm just not into receiving.

[–][deleted] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Out of interest, is not being into receiving limited to oral sex or does it extend to other forms of sex too?

[–]strictly 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Out of interest, is not being into receiving limited to oral sex or does it extend to other forms of sex too?

Usually it extends to other types of sex (people have different boundaries though).

[–]reluctant_commenter[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

I have assumed they are using new terms to refer to whether they prefer receiving or giving regarding oral sex etc.

Interesting, thanks for sharing. I guess I just find it odd because by those definitions, then, straight people could just as easily use these terms to describe their sex, e.g. a "straight woman who's a top". It seems like a far cry from the terms as they have been co-opted from gay men. Or perhaps from sub/dom "top and bottom" terms as u/GatitoMalo suggested... it seems difficult to tell.

Also I just remembered that I forgot to respond to your other message lol, my bad. I'll get back to that.

[–]strictly 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

I think those terms have gained popularity so people outside the gay male and bdsm community have starting using them too, forgetting there are other terms to use (like receiver and giver). I sometimes see people using the term "butch" referring to masculine straight women too and even masculine men even though that is a lesbian term, so I've thought it was something like.

But it’s very possible my assumption is wrong, maybe they are referring to bdsm or sex with women-identifying males, if it’s on "actuallesbians" the later is quite likely lol.

then, straight people could just as easily use these terms to describe their sex

I am not familiar with the sex lives of straight people but my impression is the phenomena of pillow princesses and stones is almost unheard of in straight sex, so if a straight woman says she is a top I would think she is referring to being dominant, not that she doesn’t like receiving oral/penetrative sex.

[–]reluctant_commenter[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

I am not familiar with the sex lives of straight people but my impression is the phenomena of pillow princesses and stones is almost unheard of in straight sex

Regardless of whether they are currently used by straight people, if a "top" is defined simply as a "giver" or being "dominant" (BDSM) then logically a straight person could use these terms and it would make sense; whereas if a "top" is the penetrating partner who has a dick, a woman could not be a "top", for example.

But, to your point-- I have definitely heard straight men describe straight women as "pillow princesses" but I have never heard a straight person use the word "stone". I think there is probably a significant amount of variation among straight people in preference of giving/receiving, just as there may be among LGB people.

[–]strictly 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

then logically a straight person could use these terms

I don't call myself a "top", I've just assumed if a lesbian called herself a "top" she meant she liked giving (not that I condone co-opting terminology from other communities). But on a personal level I don't really care if straight people use top or bottom as they are these are not lesbian terms to begin with and I wouldn't really care if straight people called themselves stone butches either even though that's a lesbian term.

if a "top" is the penetrating partner who has a dick, a woman could not be a "top", for example.

Technically a woman can penetrate a man with fingers or toys so I don't really think it matters if it refers to being a giver, being dominant or the one penetrating as a straight woman can do all that. It's the same question if a straight woman or a man can be butch, if butch just means masculine, then anyone who is masculine can be butch, but if it's lesbian specific term then straight women and men can't be butch, It's the same with top or bottom, if it's a gay male specific term then people who aren't gay males can't be tops or bottoms, otherwise they can.

[–]Elvira95Viva la figa 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

I'm curios but why don't you like to be touched? It's that a control thing or something else?

[–]strictly 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

I'm curios but why don't you like to be touched? It's that a control thing or something else?

Control over my own body perhaps, I’m not certain. I’ve never had any fantasies about receiving and the idea of receiving anyway makes me uncomfortable. So the way I see it, I simply choose to not consent to things happening to my body that makes me uncomfortable, and as I’m only with women who are sexually compatible with that arrangement it’s a non-issue. I think stones are stones for different reasons though so my case shouldn't be seen as universal.

[–]Elvira95Viva la figa 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

It's strange. I imagine it would be a dealbreaker for most. But there are passive pillow princesses out there, like fucking a sex doll. But great for you :D

[–]strictly 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

I imagine it would be a dealbreaker for most

Yes, that is why I weed those out so they can weed out me too.

like fucking a sex doll.

A sex doll can’t think, can't talk, can’t move, has no will. Not touching my private parts doesn’t make a sexual partner a sex doll and nobody I've been with has pretended to be a passive sex doll. Receiving isn't the same as being passive (and it's not the same as being submissive either, I'm not looking for being anyone's domme). I am not into casual sex so I've only had sex with women I've been in love with, so I have never regarded a sexual partner as an inanimate object.

[–]Elvira95Viva la figa 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

I mean that being only into receiving is extremely passive, but again there are surely women like that. Whether they're passive or just like getting pleasure while laying and relaxing, I'm sure it isn't a problem to find someone compatible. There is someone for everyone, they say

[–]GoValidateYourselfuseful lesbian 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

My partner and I have used "top" and "bottom" in a joking way, to refer to fingerfucking (as in who feels like going first). We don't have rigid "top" or "bottom" roles b/c we both do both. I don't know a single lesbian couple who has rigid roles of one woman always doing the fucking, and one woman always getting fucked. It's very much about mutual pleasure and reciprocity.

[–]reluctant_commenter[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I don't know a single lesbian couple who has rigid roles of one woman always doing the fucking, and one woman always getting fucked. It's very much about mutual pleasure and reciprocity.

See, that's what I thought! That's been my experience as well. I mean, there will always be outliers, but it's nice to have a balance, anyway.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

[–]GoValidateYourselfuseful lesbian 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I agree! And no prob!

[–][deleted] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I can't say I've seen lesbians use 'top' or 'bottom' to describe themselves, but I have seen them used quite commonly by straight people to be synonymous with 'dominant' and 'submissive'. I always assumed when gay men used them they referred to which is the penetrating partner and which was the receptive one, but when others used them it referred more to a power thing.

That's how I always understood it. I wasn't aware it was used solely to mean 'penetrator' and 'penetratee', or that it was seen as co opting if non gay men used the terms.

[–]reluctant_commenter[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I am not sure whether it is co-opting or not, that was just my guess. Thanks for explaining your thoughts! I think it might just be a power/BDSM thing when many people use it who are not gay men.

[–]Locke 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm a woman and sometimes make jokes about fictional characters being tops or bottoms after seeing similar jokes. I don't like the term "problematic" but this makes me think maybe I shouldn't make jokes like that. I don't personally think there's anything wrong with what somebody prefers during sex and I don't actually think there are obvious "top or bottom" personalities. I like to play with stereotypes when I make jokes but I guess maybe I'll be a bit more careful.

[–]BiHorror 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Late comment:

I have seen straight and/or bi women (alongside some lesbians) say it in some other groups I'm in. Alongside gay men. "Top" is seen as the person in control, and "bottom" as the submissive if that makes any sense. Could also be related to who's penetrating, ex pegging, for straight and/or bi women with men.

Tbh, I don't care if they use the words. Words are always gonna be appropiated by another group and made to mean something else. It's no different to what happen to words like "trigger" and "woke" so whatever.