As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases made via some of the links below (at no additional cost to you).
In a previous post about BDSM myths, we tackled common misconceptions that newcomers to BDSM often have, such as “pain is intrinsic to BDSM” and “real D/s dynamics are 24/7.” This time, we’re going to address several BDSM myths that are prevalent within the BDSM community and tend to spur debate when they come up.
1. TOPPING FROM THE BOTTOM IS BAD
Simply put, topping from the bottom is when a sub tries to verbally or physically control what a dom is doing. Both doms and subs view it as an inappropriate attempt to usurp the dom’s control and as something to avoid. The problem is that this label often gets erroneously applied to essential and normal communication on the sub’s part.
So, how can you tell the difference between real topping from the bottom and necessary communication? As the excellent BDSM educator Princess Kali notes, intention and delivery are everything. If a sub tells a dom what they want with “impatient expectation,” this may indeed be topping from the bottom. But if a sub communicates their needs and fantasies so the dom can use this information when they want to, this is not only acceptable but is to be encouraged and is definitely not topping from the bottom. Subs can and should be active participants in scene construction. Subs should also be able to communicate freely during a scene if something isn’t working.
Bottom line: Real topping from the bottom should be avoided, but it’s not as common as people make it out to be. And doms and subs should never mistake genuine communication for so-called topping from the bottom.
2. SERVICE TOPPING IS BAD
Like topping from the bottom, service topping is another misunderstood BDSM concept that unfairly gets a bad rap. A service top is someone who agrees to top their partner to please them. Service topping may not involve power exchange, or if it does, the service top may just be going through the motions to please the bottom/sub and might not identify as a dom. For this reason, some people in the kink community consider service topping to be an inauthentic form of BDSM. But is this really the case?
As sociologist and BDSM educator Julie Fennell (aka IPCookieMonster) points out, denigrating service topping trashes everything that makes a good dom.
“Good doms have to have a good understanding of what their submissives want and give it to them regularly in order to keep them around. Is that ‘service topping’? I don’t really care what you call it, but to me, it’s what good doms do. . . . If you can’t resign yourself to the fact that most bottoms have preferences . . . and that they will inevitably expect you to pay attention to those preferences, then I suggest that you give up on domming altogether, because it’s going to be pretty hard for you to keep a sub for longer than a scene.”
—Julie Fennell (IPCookieMonster)
BDSM educator Rain de Grey goes even further, saying that “All tops are service tops. It is your job as a top to blow your bottom’s mind.”
Bottom line: There’s nothing wrong with being a “service top” as long as you and your partner are satisfied. Pleasing your partner as a top or a dom should be a priority.
3. THE SUBMISSIVE IS REALLY IN CONTROL
Whenever discussions arise about who truly has control in a D/s dynamic, the standard response is often that the sub is ultimately in charge because they can end a scene by safewording. While it’s important to point out that subs aren’t powerless—especially to vanilla audiences who may believe otherwise—this is an oversimplification of how power and control work in D/s dynamics.
In reality, both doms and subs have control in a healthy D/s dynamic. Without a dominant, there’s nothing for a sub to submit to, and without a sub, there’s nothing for a dom to dominate. Both people have the power to express their limits, and both have the responsibility to abide by those limits. Although it might be more common for a dom to try to push a sub’s boundaries, the opposite can and does happen. If a sub wants a dom to do something that violates the dom’s limits, the dom can say no, just as a sub can if the situation is reversed.
Bottom line: Who is more likely to safeword doesn’t capture the nuances of how power and control really work in D/s. D/s dynamics are partnerships.
4. SUBMISSION IS A GIFT
Along with “the submissive is really in control,” “submission is a gift” is probably the most repeated maxim in BDSM. This saying gets tossed around so frequently that people rarely stop to think whether it makes sense. On its face, “submission is a gift” is supposed to convey that subs don’t submit to just anyone. Submission is precious, and no dom should take it for granted.
While this may be the case, describing submission as a gift is a misnomer because gifts are generally given as an expression of generosity with no strings attached. Submission, on the other hand, is exchanged for dominance and is absolutely conditional. It includes many expectations about a dom’s behavior and how the sub should be treated.
Bottom line: Submission is part of an exchange of power that—unlike a gift—includes numerous expectations and requirements.
5. ANYTHING GOES IN BDSM BETWEEN CONSENTING ADULTS
This is likely the most controversial of the BDSM myths we’ve discussed because many people in the BDSM community don’t see this as a myth at all but rather a guiding principle that spotlights the reverence most of us have for consent. Don’t get us wrong—consent is paramount in BDSM. But, in the words of the gender studies academic Joseph Fischel in his book Screw Consent, “consent, on its own, is insufficient to exonerate any and all forms of sexualized conduct.”
Most people would probably agree that consent does not excuse or justify extreme acts such as murder or lasting bodily harm in the name of kink. But what about erotic actions that are less cut and dried? Is consent enough to justify those?
In his book, Fischel analyzes contact sports—specifically football—as “the ubiquitous argument-by-analogy in defense of BDSM sex” and concludes that consent isn’t enough in either case. He notes that football’s problems extend beyond physical injury; the sport hampers young men’s ability to “be and do in the world.” He goes on to say that “once the ‘kink’ of consensual kinky sex starts . . . to nontrivially impair people’s capabilities to be and do in the world—then consensual sex is more like American football and should, like American football, probably be prohibited.”
In terms of BDSM, Fischel believes that extreme control is more problematic than physical injury when it comes to being and doing in the world. He uses a real-life example of a no-limits 24/7 slave situation that—predictably—went horribly wrong when the slave changed his mind about wanting to be caged in a basement for days on end, and the master ignored him, as the slave had previously instructed him to do. In the end, consent was not enough to exonerate the master (he went to prison), nor should it have been in Fischel’s opinion and in ours.
Bottom line: Consent does not excuse kinky acts that prevent people from exercising personal autonomy and participating in the world around them.
excellent article, good