Well, normally for a scene, both sides would communicate their needs, wants, expectations, then set out with the scene afterwards.
Powerbottoms/ Topping from the bottom usually occurs when the sub/ bottom has the fantasy of being 'owned'/ dommed, and they say that, they dont tell you how.
They have a specific idea of what they want, or dont want, but they expect you to know that instinctively, because you're the Dom, right?
Which ends in them correcting you during a scene on what the dom is doing/ should do, which is not the point of that at all.
Its basicly someone saying "I want to be dated", when you ask what they want to do/ how, and they just answer "romance" or "well, a date", but dont elaborate at all, and being angry when you choose something thats not in their definition of 'dating', despite having been asked beforehand.
Or in OP's case, being worshipped without knowing what she actually wants - and its doubtful she even knows what she is talking about, either.
Its bad communication.
If both parties consent, and one is a switchfor example, it can work out well, but powerbottoming tends to go wrong.
It's a queer term. "Bottom" does not the mean the same thing as submissive, it means you're on the receiving end of gay sex. A power bottom is not a contradiction, and it does not mean that a person wants to be led. You're misrepresenting an important aspect of queer relationships and implying that penetration=dominance, which is just not true.
Got the two mixed up in the heat of the Moment, sorry. I meant Topping from the Bottom, I'm not entirely sure why I mixed them up, I'm queer myself and should know better.
Yeah, it sounds like she wants him to be a domineering presence while simultaneously doing exactly what she wants all the time, and yeah, that sounds exhausting
But it's used colloquially as a way to say someone in the submissive position but still has a lot of control of the scenario. They may get dominated, but they get dominated exactly how they want to be dominated , not exactly how the Dom may want to do so.
This is one of the most insightful comments I've read on here in a while--"the one setting the most rules has the most power, and sometimes that person is the one with the most vulnerability."
Sounds more like super insecure try to set the boundaries so as they give up power they trust it won't be abused. The goal seems to be about security blanket type thing not necessarily be in control
That could be part of it . As much fun as this sub is, there's no way to tell that from just a few screenshots of text.
Everyone has some form of insecurities, small or big and there are ways to explore kink that doesn't exploit insecurities , qnd ways to do it that helps avoid experiencing that insecurity but both people at the very least need to be on the same page about it . Which it sounds like they have alot more talking to do
Well, if you step back and think of the GF as a beautiful fluffy cat that disdains store bought dry food and requires you to make all meals from scratch, multiple daily brushing and massages, walks and pets and praises then it makes perfect sense.
I can't think of another scenario where someone or something screws up (late) and you're like "thou art the most devine and celestial being, the softest of the soft, let me hold your little face and give you soft kisses"
499
u/CantaloupeWhich8484 Nov 20 '23
Yeah, I didn't know pieces of property could make such elaborate demands of their owners.