Defining What a Bottom is

The most annoying thing I’ve ever been told, sexually, is to “behave like a bottom”. My response is usually an eye roll that is felt as a tsunami in parts of Asia. In an act of feigned stupidity, I ask “Like, what the fuck is a good bottom?” He opens his mouth and spouts some of the corniest, most clichéd lines. And then, of course, I destroy my chances of ever getting laid by this person again. He says:

“Bottoms are supposed to be submissive”

I usually like leading into a gender and societal role discussion. The fact that we are both males immediately disqualifies either one of us from being the “submissive” one. Same sex relationships do not have to deal with the normal submissive/dominant bullshit that straight people need to go through. This is what the gays fought for at Stonewall. Kidding. I have no fucking idea what Stonewall was about. I’m pretty sure, however, it was something to do with societal concepts regarding homosexuality.

Gay relationships are not straight-relationships-lite. They are beautiful, fucked up, frustrating, impressively hollow and simultaneously stiflingly well-formed relationships that exist at the behest, and definition of the individuals engaging in it.

So you don’t want to be a submissive bottom? Still cool. You want to be the damsel in distress because it appeals to the top in your life’s obsession with fairytales? Knock yourself out. But the choice, like literally everything else, should be yours. Not because the top in your life said so.

Bottoms don’t…

Now, for me, it’s mainly “bottoms don’t eat ass”. I can hear some bottom, somewhere, cringe in fear with the fact that I’ve just said that. Or, a couple of med students who ask me if I’ve eaten ass recently before they let me drink from their cups. Besides ensuring that I now bring my own containers to a booze up, nothing’s changed.

The fact that society or the gay microcosm of it, should define what a person does in the privacy of their bedroom/dining room table, is fucked up. Think about it. One biologist posted the supposition that male sexuality is defined by a process called imprinting. The idea is male sexuality rarely, of ever, changes from your formative years. If you were turned on by the rugby jocks, chances are, you’ll always be turned on by them. If you’re an ass guy, this is likely to continue until you’ve lost all the feeling in your legs due to old age or death. But, as we all know, we kinda start developing new aspects of this said sexuality the older we get. That’s why some of us, whilst still deeply into the rugby jocks, have had our desire for them fine tuned. I like a little choking now, yes. Do I like being dominated? Yes. Do I like rimming said dominant top? Yes. Yes I do. Why? Because to me nothing is sexier than the idea of a dominant guy comfortable enough in his sexuality that he’s willing to let someone else eat his ass out.

Still goes back to the same issue. Everyone has to start defining their sexuality in their own ways, without the interference of other idiots. The beauty of being gay, to quote another biologist, is the fact that the societal ideas and ideals regarding gender roles do not affect you. You are bound by your own rules. Which means you create them yourself. So why bind yourself to heteronormative standards that even heterosexual people are moving away from?

Be the top/verse/bottom/gay person you were meant to be. If we’re going to follow the religious, we are destined to be the people we are. So why not be the best gay you can be? Nature abhors a vacuum. Fill whatever hole you want to, with whatever you want to fill it with. As long as it is consensual.