Talk:Top (BDSM)

	Human sexuality portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles
Mid	This redirect has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been merged. See Top and bottom in sex and BDSM (talk) Sai Emrys ¿? ✍ 05:58, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Top" has a much wider field of use in sexuality than just in BDSM. I'd like to refactor this article and bottom (BDSM) to begin with the idea of insertive and receptive sex, and move them to bottom (sex) and top (sex). - Montréalais 16:08, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

You're right that the term is not solely used in BDSM, but I don't think that there is much to write about these terms outside of the BDSM context. The biggest part of this article would be the BDSM part, so I think it should stay here. You could split this article into Top (sex) and Top (BDSM), maybe. --Conti|✉ 17:36, Aug 23, 2004 (UTC)

I agree. Dlloyd 17:46, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bottom_%28BDSM%29 I don't speak japanese, but the information appears more consistent thus.

Reversing the merger[edit]

This merger was to highly contra productive. The Spanish, Italian, Dutch and German articles clearly show that at least Switch, Top (BDSM) and Bottom (BDSM) are relevant single lemmata. Literature given there proofs this as well. Additionaly the merger was not tagged as described in Wikipedia:Merging and moving pages.

The argument about this being an "good compare-and-contrast article" is doesn't make any sense. I would like to see what would happen if merged capitalism&communism into an "compare-and-contrast article" deleting the original ones only because nobody answered to my merger ideas. Its really strange that there was allegedly no response to the pre-merger suggestions, nevertheless even the smallest amount of thoughtfulness should have prevented this. The intention to merge homosexual and BDSM topics in order to "compare-and-contrast" them while deleting the source article is at least original research if not POV. --Nemissimo 12:31, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See discussion in Talk:Top and bottom in sex and BDSM. Sai Emrys ¿? ✍ 09:12, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gender-neutral language[edit]

Changed "he" to "he or she" etc. throughout. I'm quite frankly rather shocked that a page on alternative sexuality would have been written in such a sexist manner. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.217.235.131 (talk) 10:20, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Professional_dominant redirecting here[edit]

I feel very uncomfortable with the Professional dominant page redirecting here. A BDSM top and a sex worker are entirely different things. I think having 'rent boy' redirect to 'homosexual' would be an appropriate analogue to this. Is there another more appropriate page which Professional dominant could redirect to? --Lubyanka 0:57, 4 July 2010 (UTC)