Top/Bottom, Dom/Sub, Active/Passive (Part 2): The Gay Perspective
Updated: Aug 31
An explanation, analysis, and reflection regarding common terms we regularly use (incorrectly).
When you lump everything together and have too many terms, you can learn to understand things in a new way. What the gay scene knows about roles is something the rest of the kink world could put to use.
Many of the BDSM terms we use today come from the gay leather movement in America. From there, the terms were transferred to the hetero world and have now resulted in a relatively widespread standard, which I presented in a previous article.
However, there is another path these terms have taken: from America to Europe - and specifically to Germany - within the gay fetish scene. One particular distinction is striking and immediately apparent to anyone: it is less about "top" and "bottom" and much more about "active" and "passive."
And it is all far more complicated… the “gay reality” and what everyone can learn from it.
We will take a closer look here at the precise nature of this pair of terms, how they are used, and where they overlap with or differ from other concepts. We will also explore what anyone into kink - regardless of whether they are straight, gay, or have any other orientation - can learn from this.
The penetration problem
This issue rarely arises in the heterosexual world; in the gay world, however, it is a central theme: Who penetrates whom?
The simplified standard definition is: the person who inserts the penis is "active," while the person who receives it is "passive."
This core logic has been applied to other practices as well. Someone who fingers another person is active. Someone who licks another person’s anus (rimming) is active. Someone who wraps their hand around another person’s penis to jerk them off is active. Someone who wraps their lips around another person’s penis to give a blowjob is active... - Unless the person whose penis is involved fucks the person giving the blowjob in the mouth; in that case, it becomes oral sex involving penetration (often called "mouth-fucking"). The person who was previously giving the blowjob would become the recipient of the mouth-fucking, shifting from active to passive.
When examining this active-passive logic, the focus is on who is actively performing an action. It is therefore more about the act itself than the classic act of penetration. It feels very similar to the "top-bottom" logic we encountered in the previous article.
Info:
The explanation for this lies not in an exception to the rule, but in an expanded concept of penetration. In gay vernacular, penetration does not necessarily mean entering a body orifice; rather, it signifies breaching an imaginary surface - much like a massage, where the hand penetrates the tissue without breaking the skin. Under this interpretation, the mouth penetrates the penis just as the penis penetrates the rectum. The person giving a blowjob is actively penetrating; the same applies to someone performing oral sex.
It therefore makes sense to define "active" not merely as the act of penetration itself, but as the act of taking the initiative. A person can penetrate without inserting anything, and vice versa.
In academic literature, Moskowitz, Rieger, and Roloff (2008) - writing in *Sexual and Relationship Therapy* - consistently use the terms "insertive" (referring to the person doing the inserting) and "receptive" (referring to the person receiving).
For the purposes of this discussion, the act of insertion is not the primary issue; what matters is noting that a person with a penis is not necessarily dominant, active, or a "top." Naturally, the reverse holds true as well.
The Model of Gay Logic
There are three important dimensions (if we disregard the insertive and receptive levels):
Action (active/passive): Who performs the action?
Decision (dom/sub): Who decides on the action?
Role (top/bottom): Who is perceived as superior?
In detail:
Level of action: Who is doing something, and who is on the receiving end of an action? The person wielding the whip is active; the person taking the blows is passive. The rigger is active, the model passive. This is physically observable and immediately apparent even to outsiders.
Level of decision-making: Who determines what happens? This level arises from the transfer of power: the submissive person relinquishes decision-making authority. This usually occurs within a defined framework, meaning the framing itself determines who is actually dominant. It is difficult to discern who established the parameters and who is deferring to whom without questioning the situation.
Level of roles: Who appears to hold the superior position? This level is created through externally perceptible aspects such as posture, clothing, gaze, manner of speaking, positioning within the space, tools, equipment, and much more. It is a matter of staging and perception. It holds no inherent truth value - only an effect.
Three levels that belong together but are not connected.
In most cases, all three levels coexist and manifest in one way or another. However, a specific manifestation at one level does not automatically dictate that another level must also manifest in a particular way - even though some people assume otherwise. Yet, such assumptions represent common errors in reasoning.
Since we are primarily introducing the "role level" here, I would like to walk you through it using an example.
An example
One person sits on the sofa; a second kneels in front, performing oral sex. The person kneeling determines the pace and style.
Variation 1. Both are relaxed; no prior agreements, no power imbalance. Kneeling person: active, receptive, D/s-neutral. Seated person: passive, insertive, D/s-neutral. Role dynamic: undefined. There is no "top" or "bottom" here—just two people and a sexual act.
Variation 2. The seated person is tied to the sofa. The action remains the same; the distribution of decision-making power remains the same. The only change is who appears to be the subordinate. The kneeling person is now the "top," despite kneeling.
Variation 3. No restraints. The seated person leans back with legs spread, a glass in hand, demonstratively ignoring the person kneeling. They still determine nothing. They still take no action. Yet, they are unmistakably the "top."
The same act, the same distribution of actions, the same distribution of decision-making power. Three completely different scenes. The difference lies entirely in the role dynamic—and it feels like it changes everything.
So, what does that mean?
The three levels give rise to three separate questions.
Level of action - "Who takes action?"
Level of decision-making - "Who makes the decision?"
Level of roles - "Who appears as the lead figure?"
Three distinct questions that all share the same set of possible answers:
"You"
"I"
"Both of us together"
"Both of us, taking turns"
"Neither of us"
Most people assume that, simply because the questions sound similar, they must give the same answer for each one. But that is incorrect! Each question can be answered in a completely different way.
Another example
For instance, you might decide to engage in a fem-dom scenario. The partner perceived as female is intended to take the lead and formally direct the scene. However, that person might feel unsure in this role and prefer to decide collaboratively what should happen. Alternatively, the person in the bottom role might be the one feeling unsure, or perhaps you simply want to shape the scene together. In this case, the decision-making power is shared between both parties. And who actually takes action? That can remain open. You might agree that the fem-dom partner uses a strap-on to take the other partner; or decide that the partner serves the fem-dom figure as a maid or sissy; or choose to seek out a third person to whom the submissive partner is made available. - Keep your ideas dirty ;)
You decide!
A Dom can take the active "top" role, and a sub can take the passive "bottom" role - but they don't have to.
Someone who ostensibly wants to relinquish all decision-making power but has everything pre-planned may not actually want to be a sub - but rather passive, taking the "bottom" role while ultimately still dictating what happens.
Someone who allows themselves to be served as a Master - without wishing to make decisions - enjoys the role of holding power without actually wanting to exercise it.
All these combinations are valid concepts.
Perspective matters
Since the role level essentially represents a type of scene that is perceived subjectively, it is necessary to determine whose perception counts. It could be one’s own perspective, that of the partner, or that of an outside observer. Alternatively, the parties might have agreed upon a shared perspective beforehand as part of the scene's setup. Because the same scene can be interpreted differently by different individuals, it is difficult to make a sweeping generalization. It is even conceivable that both people might view themselves as taking the "top" or "bottom" role, depending on how they interpret the scene.
Putting into perspective and context
In reality, the roles are not sharply defined; there are many gray areas and transitions, depending on the context and situation. It is not a matter of black and white, but rather a spectrum along which one moves—and not every level needs to be fully expressed in every setting.
This classification can help us better understand and articulate what we want and are looking for. However, in practice, hardly anyone makes these distinctions, nor should one expect others to immediately grasp these nuances.
What anyone can learn from this
To simplify matters, let’s say there are three states: one side, the other side, and neutral—or something else. Three levels, each with three states, mathematically result in 27 possible combinations. Yet, we often remain stuck in just a few of them because we aren't even aware of the options available.
Some designations are umbrella terms, such as "Domina" or "Master." Because they are used so loosely, people tend to project whatever they wish onto them.
Other terms might do a better job, yet they too are often used imprecisely—such as "God*in" (God/Goddess), which actually describes a completely passive role that makes no decisions of its own but is merely projected onto the person by others.
The terms that work best are the "negative roles"—like "Service Top" or "Power Bottom." While these often carry negative connotations due to their fundamental clash with mainstream concepts, that very friction makes them distinct and clearly defined.
What kind of person are you? Do you tend to stick to classic combinations, or how do you mix and match elements from the levels mentioned?
Feel free to write it in the comments.
Sources and Contextualization
Many of the definitions and terms presented here are not derived from external sources but are based on the author's personal experience and socialization. To the best of my knowledge, there is no reliable German-language literature on this subject. The interpretations presented here are neither based on statistical data nor scientifically verifiable. However, they do not merely represent an opinion; rather, they reflect personal experiences within the gay community. The facts of the matter cannot necessarily be clearly defined. The article focuses on the insights gained from these experiences - insights that may be relevant to the reader regardless of any scientific basis.
External sources used:
Top/Bottom, Encyclopedia.com — https://www.encyclopedia.com/social-sciences/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/topbottom
Dear straight people: Stop identifying as tops and bottoms, Out — https://www.out.com/gay-news/straight-people-tops-bottoms
Top, bottom, switch, Wikipedia — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top,_bottom,_switch
Moskowitz, Rieger & Roloff (2008): Tops, bottoms and versatiles, Sexual and Relationship Therapy 23(3) — https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14681990802027259
Moskowitz & Roloff (2017): Recognition and Construction of Top, Bottom, and Versatile Orientations in Gay/Bisexual Men, Archives of Sexual Behavior 46(1) — https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-016-0810-7
Topping and Bottoming: What's in a label?, SexInfo Online (UC Santa Barbara) — https://sexinfoonline.com/topping-and-bottoming-whats-in-a-label/
Passive haben mehr Auswahl, queer.de — https://www.queer.de/detail.php?article_id=7354
Umfrage: Nur jeder zehnte Schwule will einen passiven Partner, queer.de — https://www.queer.de/detail.php?article_id=29312
Aktiv / Passiv, HomoWiki — https://www.homowiki.de/Aktiv_/_Passiv
Comments