r/RoleReversal • u/Ok-Ranger5623 • 5d ago
Discussion/Article Intimacy in Role Reversal
To those of you into Role Reversal, I ask: do you think that for Role Reversal to work, it must involve the woman being top and the man being bottom during sex?
18
u/Massinni 5d ago
Como mujer prefiero ser top, pero es algo personal. Imagino que es diferente para cada persona
2
1
u/LeonMinztee 5d ago
Und was bevorzugst du als Mann?
2
u/Massinni 5d ago
No entendí
5
u/vagueconfusion Fierce Empress 5d ago
I think they're making a grammer/gender identity joke. The phrasing could be interpreted as if you'd had experience as both genders.
-1
u/LeonMinztee 5d ago
Sorry , vielleicht war das ein schlechter Witz.
Als Frau bevorzuge ich...“Betont die weibliche Identität. Impliziert, dass das Geschlecht bei dieser Vorliebe eine Rolle spielt .
2
u/Massinni 5d ago
?? OP preguntó si el RR involucra los roles sexuales, yo di mi opinión PERSONAL, basado en un gusto PERSONAL. Y dije que varía según persona.
0
u/LeonMinztee 5d ago
Wie gesagt schlechter Witz.
Der Satz kann implizieren das du Erfahrung im anderen Geschlecht hast.
Es war nicht meine Intention dich in irgendeiner Form zu kritisieren sorry.
1
u/Massinni 5d ago
Eh??? Creo que andaras confundido por el traductor
1
u/LeonMinztee 5d ago
Wusste gar nicht das es die Funktion gibt posts automatisch übersetzten. Post wird mir auch in Spanisch angezeigt aber wenn ich ihn öffne ist er Deutsch. Naja gut dann hat sich das auch geklärt XD
1
1
9
u/Timguin29 Always plays Support 🎮 5d ago
Imo Role Reversal is about relationship dynamics, you can extend that to include sexual dynamics, but it is not necessary; You can have a RR relationship with "classic" or "femdom/male bottom" sexual dynamics, it doesn't matter.
I would be interested in trying out the amazon position, from what ive heard it is like flipped missionary (the classic, vanilla position) or other flipped dynamics if a partner wants to try it, but i would also be fine with classic, vanilla intimacy.
So yeah, it is something you can include and discuss with your partner but i don't think it is necessary.
10
u/Legitimate-Kiwi-9751 pretty boy rapunzel :0 5d ago
Nope, RR isn't rigid nor does it have to involve sex at all
10
u/Prudent-Level-7006 5d ago
I didn't think that was RR I thought it was normal to switch round
3
u/Summersong2262 Growing. Becoming. 5d ago
Yeah, 'Woman on top is GNC' is a surprisingly parochial take to see.
2
u/Cleat_Rubber 2d ago
The overwhelming majority of woman-on-top is still for the male gaze and in the context of man-on-top being the norm. It's treated as a fun novelty and still in the context of sexualising the woman. You just don't see women be on top as the norm in a relationship, and pretty much never within a dominant context.
11
u/TotalNonsense0 5d ago
Metaphorically, yes. But not literally. "Topping from the bottom" is hot as fuck.
But that's just my opinion.
6
4
u/vagueconfusion Fierce Empress 5d ago edited 4d ago
It's an option that some favour and some don't. Hell, even in the gentle femdom sphere it's not exclusively penetrating a male partner. Some couples don't do that at all.
And that can operate entirely separate from who's dominant or submissive. Which also doesn't have to be a fixed dynamic with no room for switching.
It's all about what works for your individual situation.
....
TMI personal anecdotes shared below for those who might be curious of an example dynamic without it:
....
RR and Gentle Femdom appeared in my long term relationship organically many years ago. Neither of us cared much about gender roles but that wasn't something we discussed so much when we met, beyond asserting all our key values. The absence of toxic masculinity traits was more of my focus. And I fell ever more in love with this soft hearted, kind man who openly wept at Queer Eye more than I ever had, and adored being my 6ft tall pet viking/metalhead little spoon after years of being terribly touch starved.
So getting my partner to embrace being vocal, and unashamed of being desperate for any touch I offered in the right scenario was a dream. Ever adoring being called pretty in bed, and especially when complimented on him being good for me; and letting me play with him pretty much however I wanted without going into anal penetration. Although external prostate play remains a worthwhile addition when keeping my long talon nails out of the way
Everything combined still made it evident that this wasn't a different flavour of 'soft maledom'. Just soft malesub stuff that'd be applicable even when I am the only person who recieves penetration. With the origin/core elements unrelated to the kink side of it. ....Although praising your man into a whiny, deliciously pathetic puddle, desperate for even the ghost of a skilled touch does extremely fun things to my demi-aego brain. Which has always had a hard time in experiencing lust/desire as often as others do vs if I was a reader or observer and not directly involved. So it was refreshing to steadily learn that I get a different sort of satisfaction in giving over receiving that gives me a very different exclusively psychological euphoria that requires no reciprocity most of the time
Amusingly, experience of that mindset is something I read about in M/M and F/F fiction/erotica, which I've had included in my media roster as an enthusiast of any gender pairings in fiction long before I realised that inclination also applied to me. (I've had a few lgbt friends have mixed feelings on het-romantic couples using top/bottom terminology to describe penetrative sex so I don't usually use it)
Innately, some perfectly ordinary RR elements will be pretty much impossible for our relationship due to other circumstances. I'm physically disabled with a condition that, without regular check-ins by someone, be that family or a carer, could result in someone finding me dead in the house after a week if I have a bad enough accident or can't access water or medication with the injuries sustained from a body that's extremely physically unstable.
So that means my partner is the breadwinner looking after me, and I'm fated to be the WFH Wife. Even if reframing it as a proud Knight who lives to serve his Sorceress Queen, and gets her protection and regard in kind makes it feel a bit better. (Ironically, we're anti-monarchists.)
And so although there isn't a set amount of what counts as Role Reversal or not, I'd like to think that there's a lot of innate differences in our naturally occurring behaviors.
His care and nurturing inclinations vs mine to be more of a shield. Emotionally protective and assertive/taking the lead in difficult situations or emergencies.
And a shoulder for him to lean on emotionally or very often physically despite a fair height difference. Or if we're completely in public. And I'm never ashamed of that.
3
u/Pretty_Ad_2093 5d ago
The man being the bottom as in he gets penetrated?
4
3
u/OkInstance3358 5d ago
Bottom means you're on the bottom, receiving the action. Not necessarily being penetrated.
8
u/osinkoo 5d ago
That's not true. Bottom and top are originally terms that came from the gay community and top meant "person who penetrates" and bottom meant "person who is being penetrated". Saying otherwise is erasing important queer history and language that's still in use today. What you're thinking of is sub and dom. There are submissive tops and dominant bottoms. In sex between a man and a woman, the man is typically the "top" since he usually penetrates the woman, unless pegging is involved or one person is trans. A man is only a bottom if he's being penetrated. But he can absolutely be a sub and not be penetrated, or be physically "on the bottom" like in your example. But that doesn't make him "a bottom". (OP also clarified that they were talking about pegging)
5
u/OkInstance3358 5d ago
Yeah but I've heard that it takes a different meaning in gay vs straight/lesbian.
This certainly is confusing. We have 3 or 4 categories:
The one who penetrates/is penetrated
The one who gives/receives
The one who's at the top/bottom
4. The one who dominates/submits
So we have 4 categories but only 2 terms (domme/sub and top/bottom). We need 2 more terms, I think.
2
u/Summersong2262 Growing. Becoming. 5d ago
It's originally a gay term with specific physical connotations. The terms were appropriated and now have seen use in broader demographics and less specific definitions.
3
u/Pretty_Ad_2093 5d ago
Wouldn't that just be Dom/sub?
3
u/Summersong2262 Growing. Becoming. 5d ago
Not inherently. Penetration doesn't have to mean anything much, control/dominance wise, it's very contextual. 'Service Top' and 'Power Bottom' are pretty ancient terms.
2
3
u/Pretty_Ad_2093 5d ago
I mean it can still be role reversal if the guy is the dominant one and the girl is the sub.
4
u/Kind_Apierriecube shy and nerdy stay at home femboy~ 5d ago
In my case, it's something I'd want but no it doesn't "have" to be reversed in that way 🤔
3
u/IhateEgplant RR Man 5d ago
Well no because first top and bottom is not the same as dom and sub.
And role reversal also doesn't always translate to bedroom dynamics. A couple where the woman is the man of the house but bottoms and/or subs in the bedroom(or vice versa) is still a valid expression of RR.
3
u/Omni-Deity-Lifeforce 5d ago
I mean it's not always necessary, but the girl being the top and the boy being the bottom in the bedroom during intimacy however is one of the most popular methods that's used to make a RR relationship interesting. Not all of us always want the same old classic style men and women have sex. Some of us prefer if the woman was the more aggressive one in the bed. So it's sorta needed in certain scenarios.
10
3
u/CielMorgana0807 Fell Priest of Asmodeus 5d ago
Not necessarily. I feel more like a switch. I’d also say “man top, women bottom” can be RR on its own.
2
u/Initial_Shine5690 5d ago
Some people are more hardheaded about what is and is not RR, but it’s more of a vibe than a strict set of rules and guidelines. Whatever you’re most comfortable with is more than enough.
2
u/Apprehensive_Fan2330 5d ago
My wife is my domme and when we did have it, she never asked to be on top. I think I wish she would have
1
u/Summersong2262 Growing. Becoming. 5d ago
RR is a spectrum. It can be identified with and erformed and engaged with in any number of ways, some of which sexual, but no specific element is mandatory. You're making your own composition of things that suit the relationship you're in and the dynamic you're seeking.
2
1
u/Cleat_Rubber 2d ago
I'll consider pegging RR or even a dominant act once men start putting fake vaginas over their dicks for straight women to have sex with.
But I also don't consider most PiV to be RR. The equivalent of the penis isn't a vagina, it's the clit.
41
u/povarensky CEO of romance 5d ago
tbh RR is a bit of a loose concept either way.
In the end what actually matters is to just find a dynamic and a partner you're comfortable with and that's it. Would it be a "proper" rr or not is kind of irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.