Phallic Friday - "topping from the bottom"

I used this phrase in a post last week, and my most prolific commenter asked me to do a post to explain it.
So... this is for you, Lily. My explanation of what it means.

(Please be aware that my understanding of the BDSM world is rudimentary. This is my understanding and you may well have another description of the term. If so, please feel free to comment).

This term "topping from the bottom" is used about the BDSM world. Part of BDSM involves Submission from Submissives (people who give control of their pleasure to another person) and Domination by Dominants/Doms/Dommes (people who get pleasure from controlling another's pleasure).

In the 'normal' role of a submissive, he/she allows the Dominant to dictate the play/sexual acts/the pleasure giving. Truly submissive people play no role in directing what happens. They have a safe word which can be used when they cannot cope with going any further, but otherwise, their pleasure involves the giving over of themselves to another.

If a submissive is new, struggling to fit into the role, unbelieving/untrusting of the Dominant, having a bad day, not into the role, (any number of reasons) they may struggle with allowing someone to direct their pleasure. They may speak, give commands, back chat, surreptitiously direct the scene, move their body to change how something works, or make some kind of act that takes control from the Dominant. If the submissive is directing how the pleasuring occurs, then they're said to be "topping from the bottom" - in other words, pretending to submit when they are actually dictating the play from a supposedly submissive position.

In the book I was reading where I saw this happening, the male was the submissive. He was an alpha male, a protector, a strong strong man ... who liked to submit and allow Dommes (female dominants) to work with him. Except he always managed to have them allowing him to give them pleasure. He loved cunnilingus. He also loved to fill a woman, and so manipulated the women in subtle ways, to allow this to happen. For example, he showed greatest pleasure when women got wet, dripped, showed themselves to him. Subtly, he was letting them know what he wanted... and they gave it to him. This isn't something that's 'wrong'... it brings pleasure to both people... but in the true sense of being submissive, it's cheating. But if you're both happy, who cares?

But this is where the book got into my head. The Dominant worked this sub out. She knew what he was doing. She was fairly new, but extensively trained as a Domme. She wasn't just mucking around, she wanted the lifestyle - and he said he did too. So she made him submit to her. She refused him contact with her. He didn't get to eat her out, or fill her. She made him take an anal vibe set on a timer, and left him to orgasm three times in an hour, alone, with viewers. Not something he thought he'd like...but the submission turns him on anyway.

Her action was clever. It takes away his usual pleasure. It makes him bend to her will. It stops him dictating what he wants and what she does. It makes him submit. To her. And she's earned his respect - he's received pleasure, she's held off on her own, except the pleasure from making him submit.

But the book was even more clever. He wasn't broken easily. He tested her every time they were together. He knew it. She knew it. So it's a complete mind-fuck as well as the physical.

And that to me is a really powerful BDSM story.

I hope that's given a bit more of an understanding of the term. And I hope my interpretation hasn't offended anyone.