1) And how! Few things frustrate me as much as the simple equations: bottom = passive = weak = feminine = female stand-in = empty vessel top = active = strong = masculine = male actualized = almighty penis
I wonder when preferred sexual positions morphed through kink into identity. Does "generally preferring X" require an intractable identity? Theoretically speaking, if I strongly preferred doggie style for several years, then switched to reverse cowgirl, does that make me an Ex-Doggie or a lirgwoC? Is wearing a strap-on crossing the identity barrier? Would that make me a lirgwoC-Ex-Doggie-Packin'? Should I get license plates? Notify my therapist?
Mostly, I think people are people. We all wake up, brush our teeth (hopefully), and engage in economic productivity (or not). For a sexual role to overwhelm people-ness, shouldn't it be the focus of a magnificent, blinding obsession? Wouldn't that push H/D into OOC territory? Pushing "he is a top/bottom", rather than "he generally tops or bottoms", feels like a characterization shortcut. Or a phase people pass through exploring sexuality, identity, and/or writing.
My 2) The 90s Disney Villain Solution. 90s Disney onesheets for animated features inevitably contained this phrase describing the villain: "...he/she is actually just misunderstood...". Really?! In terms of H/D, it's when everyone is suddenly and illogically good, except for Voldemort and one character classified as dispensable, usually Lucius. I'm not saying Slytherins or certain characters should always be over-the-top villains. Neither works for me. I prefer EWE and Epilogue-compliant where good and evil is more likely to fit in an adult context.
3) Rape as romance is a big squick for me. Can't go there.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-06-05 03:18 am (UTC)bottom = passive = weak = feminine = female stand-in = empty vessel
top = active = strong = masculine = male actualized = almighty penis
I wonder when preferred sexual positions morphed through kink into identity. Does "generally preferring X" require an intractable identity? Theoretically speaking, if I strongly preferred doggie style for several years, then switched to reverse cowgirl, does that make me an Ex-Doggie or a lirgwoC? Is wearing a strap-on crossing the identity barrier? Would that make me a lirgwoC-Ex-Doggie-Packin'? Should I get license plates? Notify my therapist?
Mostly, I think people are people. We all wake up, brush our teeth (hopefully), and engage in economic productivity (or not). For a sexual role to overwhelm people-ness, shouldn't it be the focus of a magnificent, blinding obsession? Wouldn't that push H/D into OOC territory? Pushing "he is a top/bottom", rather than "he generally tops or bottoms", feels like a characterization shortcut. Or a phase people pass through exploring sexuality, identity, and/or writing.
My 2) The 90s Disney Villain Solution. 90s Disney onesheets for animated features inevitably contained this phrase describing the villain: "...he/she is actually just misunderstood...". Really?! In terms of H/D, it's when everyone is suddenly and illogically good, except for Voldemort and one character classified as dispensable, usually Lucius. I'm not saying Slytherins or certain characters should always be over-the-top villains. Neither works for me. I prefer EWE and Epilogue-compliant where good and evil is more likely to fit in an adult context.
3) Rape as romance is a big squick for me. Can't go there.