the old faithful

[floorpigeon]

All these years later, I'm still not sure if this is true: are people's preferences for bottoms in slash pairings directly correlated with which character they'd want taken care of? And if so, what does this say about feminism, ideas about gender roles, etc.

I totally get that feminism gets some stuff wrong-- stuff to do with stuff women do feel rather than should feel. It can be overly prescriptive on issues that are too hormonal/biological rather than simply cultural. This is also the case with other social movements (the didacticism), but only veganism and environmentalism seem on par with feminism in this sense. Somehow, believing in 'the right thing' becomes outrage at like, human nature, too easily. Not cool with me. But still.

It's never been natural for me to associate the character I'd like to bottom with infantilizing or identification, even, and I don't know how to judge my own freakishness. Reading (and enjoying) bottom!Kirk fics has especially brought this home to me. I prefer top!Kirk because I like the dynamic with Spock better, because it exposes aspects of Spock I find interesting (his emotional yielding to Kirk becomes manifested physically, yet also problematized). I find I'm ok with bottom/switch!Kirk if the fic explores similar issues with Spock anyway, though in my mind I also simply don't like the issues bottom!Kirk has (not interesting to me psychologically). Other people seem to focus on who's more 'in-control' emotionally (tops), who's more of a woobie (bottoms), who's prettier or skinnier (often bottoms), even. It's just kind of problematic in both characterization & feminist ways. Ironically, yaoi manga plays with these cliches a lot of times where the point is having a pretty-boy top or whatever, though I'm not sure that's ideal, but it's more than slash seems to do.

The 'realism' angle seems irrelevant, btw; like, I don't care if most gay men don't do penetrative sex, or if the focus on top/bottom itself is 'wrong' (and everyone should switch). That's too didactic/prescriptive. But there's so much predictability & rigidity in most people's preferences that that itself seems problematic somehow-- gender-roles, etc-- except I myself am so hardcore about top!Harry. Though honestly, this is definitely partly rooted in just the horrid characterizations of almost all top!Dracos. Honestly, he's just not dommy at all. The whole thing where he wants to take care of Harry or thinks Harry is a woobie in any way is just so groan-worthy it's embarrassing. And I mean, having Draco be 'cool' enough to top a badass Harry is just silly. I mean, if someone wrote a pathetic Draco topping a badass Harry, ok (if unsatisfying), but that pretty much never happened. Which is probably evidence for the psychological basis thing. *sigh*

Comments

[cellia.livejournal.com]

All these years later, I'm still not sure if this is true: are people's preferences for bottoms in slash pairings directly correlated with which character they'd want taken care of? And if so, what does this say about feminism, ideas about gender roles, etc.

The cliche I remember most (probably because it rings true-ish for me) is that we tend to want our favs on the bottom. Or more generally, we like it when our favs are the chased, the beloved (also the tortured and the victim). It's likely there's a societal reason for that, since I think many many women have it in common.

But I think it's also a way of "proving" a favored character is awesome. Flashbacks to the zillions of characters and love triangles in one of my 1st fandoms, Ranma, here.

There's a lot of stuff to sort through in fic about "top" vs "bottom" and sex and whether the writer actually translates it into domination in personality (topping from the bottom etc etc), though. It's all kind of complicated and tangled, especially since, as you say, realism isn't really the point and it's all kinda symbolic or fantasy-esque.

I will say, for me, a lot of it is about wanting certain characters put through certain motions and enjoying certain configurations. Like having X pine after Y, having A misunderstand and then pin B to the mattress in a dub-conish way. Sometimes these configs are done with skill, sometimes not. Other people's configs are more obvious when I don't share them (and when they require bending the plot--I'll read my narrative kinks done poorly, but my antikinks require tons of writerly skill to swallow).

It's probably a reader personality thing. Like woobie!Draco (or woobie!Krycek or woobie!Loki or woobie!villain) ... I have absolutely no interest in. I roll my eyes. I cringe at the twisting of the source material.

But I can get down for a woobie!underageHarry getting taken care of by Snape or something so... lol. I would much rather read an evil!Draco topping Harry than a woobie!Draco. So... I think my point is that a lot of it comes down to the overlay/judgment the reader brings to the source material. (Like some people thinking Slytherin is just misunderstood and outcasts, and some thinking they're basically Hitler youth)

I do think there are some tropes that will always be strong, since many female readers share similar overlays through.

blah blah blah