Male Sexual Hierarchy

[ErosWired]

This is a theme I keep finding myself coming back to because I can’t decide what to make of it. On the one hand we’re all men, all ostensibly equal. Yet on the other hand, our discussions here are laden with stratification - Tops/bottoms, Alphas/betas/omegas, Dominants/submissives, Men/faggots, etc. There’s undeniably a sense that there is a hierarchy among men when in comes to sexual roles. Obviously, what that hierarchy consists of is by no means universally agreed, but the rhetoric is so consistently applied that there has to be something to it.

 I recently read a post in which a member wrote about how he enjoyed fucking faggots to put them in their place because they craved it. I can’t altogether dispute that there are men who do crave a certain kind of use, even humiliation or degradation - but how do we define their “place”? I serve Men by being bred by them, taking their cocks and being inseminated by them; I don’t Top anyone. How should I describe my “place”?

 It seems as though the value and importance is placed on being the penetrator, the inseminator - and this is not surprising, as this is the defining masculine function. The opposite if that, clearly, is to be the one penetrated, and seeded. In spite of protestations that attempt to assign a masculine attribute to this because it happens to a male, it is inherently an essentially female function in sexual terms. So it would seem that the more a man performs a female role, the lower he stands in relation to other men.

But this isn’t all of it. There’s also the question of whether the man expresses pride, or dignity, or has standards, or possesses skills. How differently would two men be measured if, say, one was selectively promiscuous but had very mediocre sexual skills, while the other was a no-loads-refused cumdump with exceptional skills? What, for that matter, is the significance of a man’s level of promiscuity in relation to his “place”?

 I realize that many will say that there is no actual hierarchy, and do not subscribe to the notion. But I cannot escape the sense that I do, indeed, have a “place” in relation to other men that I occupy in the sexual sphere, even if it applies nowhere else. I can’t refute a Top who would take pleasure in brutally fucking me “into my place” because I have a strong instinct that there is a place I belong. I just don’t know how to describe what the nature of my place is, or his is, or what makes them what they are. I think it has to do with power, and aggression, and dominance, but I’m pretty sure there’s more to it than that and I can’t see it because I can’t perceive the workings of the Top mind.

If anyone has any thought on this I’d be interested to hear them.

[rock-cock-jock]

Yes, there is definitely a hierarchy. Even going back to ancient rome, homo sex was alot more accepted in society but there was def a hierarchy with the top being of higher social class and the btm being a slave or foreigner or lower class. Homo sex between guys of the same class was not done 'publicly'. Even without the historical context to suggest that it's a bottom up construct, media is rife with this implication - porn casting, erotica plotlines, dating profiles, etc. I think humans are innately sensitive to power dynamics and hierarchy regardless of sex or sexuality anyways and this plays out in social situations, workplace authority, who you can influence, respect when you speak, etc. 

[ErosWired]

I just happened to stumble across this just after I posted the topic:

[ErosWired]

13 minutes ago, rock-cock-jock said:

I think humans are innately sensitive to power dynamics

I think so too, but this is what complicates the question here - when it comes to dominance and submission in sex between males, there is usually a power exchange (unless non-consensual), and in this exchange the one who actually controls the exchange is the one on the bottom, as the consent must be given.

[rock-cock-jock]

haha, I love that. beta tops=vers guys=bottom boy=boy toy though? Dunno about that. Also, sub males and omega males - is there a need to have 2 different tiers? could collapse them into one imo

[ErosWired]

I’m not suggesting that chart is a good breakdown of a hierarchy, but it does suggest that the perception is out there, including the notion that “fuck-hole faggots” are the lowest of the low.

[NWUSHorny]

I may not be normal, but I have never really understood the whole dominant/submissive concept. I am not submissive in any sense, but would not consider myself dominate either. I guess that puts me in the beta male tier of that chart (which I don't think is really accurate), but my preferred sexual partners would be from the same tier. 

[evilqueerpig]

Yes, the male sexual hierarchy exists, but it doesn't apply to everybody.  I identify as QUEER and I'm 50/50 vers, so I don't fit into any box.

[bbzh]

I'm a verse bottom and I hate to be forced to suck dick. I think it's humiliating if a top holds the back of my head while he throat fucks me. I guess I'm a pussy cunt? I only like to be fucked doggy so I don't have to face the top. I need to be fucked and bred so I don't "get too big for my britches". However, I will top guys who are smaller and younger than me if they are waiting doggy and I don't have to face them. They can't present themselves as my equal or I will not fuck them. OK, so let me find a sex therapist because I should not be allowed to roam free being this fucked up in the head 😂. 

[viking8x6]

I'm with @NWUSHorny on this one. I'm aware that this is a thing, but: I see people subscribing to this or that hierarchy, and jockeying for place in it, or happy with their place in it... and my reaction is very much "OK... whatever." I'm just not wired that way. I can role-play dom or sub (within limits) but it's definitely acting for me, and not at all connected with my psyche. I find politics similarly baffling.

[rock-cock-jock]

7 minutes ago, viking8x6 said:

I'm with @NWUSHorny on this one. I'm aware that this is a thing, but: I see people subscribing to this or that hierarchy, and jockeying for place in it, or happy with their place in it... and my reaction is very much "OK... whatever." I'm just not wired that way. I can role-play dom or sub (within limits) but it's definitely acting for me, and not at all connected with my psyche. I find politics similarly baffling.

Totally agree. The sub-dom dynamic is a fun fetish and it really makes the perceived hierarchy explicit. However, this kind of thing needs to be talked about a bit beforehand and it's a controlled acted scenario with some mutual trust tbh. The problem is when some guys internalize it and tops go on power trips and become narcissists in their own lives or bottoms internalizing this mentality to diminish their own sense of self worth. Both are mentally unhealthy as reality-dissociative conditions tbh. From a hookup point of view, it's jarring to meet these types. When I was in Boston once, I met this power trip type top off grindr, 50s hairy muscular, that out of the blue started calling me faggot this faggot that and poppin condescensions left right and center. I was kinda like wtf, I'm not ok with this, and I had to straight up tell him that this kind of thing was unacceptable and if he kept doing it I was going to punch him the throat. Unfortunately, that kinda ruined the momentum and he mumbled sorry and left.

[highcountrybb]

There’s nothing “manly” or masculine about men having sex with other men, regardless of top/bottom. Both are faggots, betas and at the very bottom of the sexual pyramid. We are in many ways, subhuman. We’re not really male/men as we’re “faggot” - a totally different species altogether. It is best that we embrace this biological fact and teach it to the world. “Please, do not judge me, for I am a faggot, and I was thus born this way.”

Margie: “Well hello, Valerie, this must be your son?”

Valerie: “No, Margie, this is my faggot. I don’t have a male child. I have a daughter and a faggot.”

 

 

[NWUSHorny]

34 minutes ago, rock-cock-jock said:

I met this power trip type top off grindr, 50s hairy muscular, that out of the blue started calling me faggot this faggot that and poppin condescensions left right and center. I was kinda like wtf, I'm not ok with this, and I had to straight up tell him that this kind of thing was unacceptable and if he kept doing it I was going to punch him the throat. Unfortunately, that kinda ruined the momentum and he mumbled sorry and left.

I've been in similar situations, even if he was balls deep inside me when I reached my limit , we didn't even finish the fuck. I'm the same way with bottoms that want to be dominated or humiliated, it turns me off to the point I can't finish fucking them. For me gay sex works best when it is between equals, and in my ideal 1 on 1 hookup we both end up a with a lose cummy hole.

Edited May 5, 2022 by NWUSHorny

[rock-cock-jock]

11 minutes ago, highcountrybb said:

There’s nothing “manly” or masculine about men having sex with other men, regardless of top/bottom. Both are faggots, betas and at the very bottom of the sexual pyramid. We are in many ways, subhuman. We’re not really male/men as we’re “faggot” - a totally different species altogether. It is best that we embrace this biological fact and teach it to the world. “Please, do not judge me, for I am a faggot, and I was thus born this way.”

Margie: “Well hello, Valerie, this must be your son?”

Valerie: “No, Margie, this is my faggot. I don’t have a male child. I have a daughter and a faggot.”

 

 

ok, there's alot to unpack here. First and foremost, I hope you and whoever reads this doesn't associate their sense of self worth with their sexuality, sex role or sexual fetishes.  Who you choose to have sex with and how you do it is a very very small part of what defines you as a person and quite frankly, your comment undermines the personhood of the gay community and decades of struggle for us to not be despised as second-hand citizens in mainstream society. Who knows how accepting, even in the slightest, that horrible train of thought that you are less of a person because of your sexuality will subconsciously bias your life's path in things like achieving your goals, making friends, forming relationships, etc.?

[rock-cock-jock]

Second, your arguments on a biological basis are flawed.

1) Homosexuality is quantitatively hereditary, widespread across all current and historic societies, has a strong additive genetic basis and dates back to at least the hunter-gatherer era. Additionally, the persistent prevalence of homosexuals is significantly higher than what may be calculated for a recessive trait of no fitnes. So, it appears to be more common than can be plausibly explained by mutation–selection balance and therefore offers a fitness benefit to a population, a benefit strong enough as to date back to hunter gatherer times and to manifest in every human society, including geographically isolated ones. What this evolutionary fitness is, is still up for debate but some theories are that it promotes social integration, prosocial bond formation, better communication and connectivity. But assuming you're equating fitness with value as a person (illogical regardless), then that argument doesn't stand up.

2) Once again, for the umpteenth time, sexual identity and sexual behavior are NOT the same. There is a whole forum category on breedingzone for straight guys that fuck guys on the side for crying out loud but still identify as straight. Furthermore, there are tons of straight and bi guys that have m2m sex and then still live heteronormative lives as well as father children simultaneously. Gay guys also father children, albeit at 20% occurrence, but the machinery still works obviously. Considering this degree of reproductive integration, how can you argue that men who have sex with men are a different species? 

 

1 hour ago, highcountrybb said:

There’s nothing “manly” or masculine about men having sex with other men, regardless of top/bottom.

3) The implication that you're making is that degree of masculinity is the metric being used to determine hierarchical position. Now, this is a legitimate hypothesis and worth discussing. I have also considered this to be a factor in how it may determine sex role, sex position, sex dynamics, wanting of occasional casual sex, full on sluttiness or monogamous/open relationships, etc. However, the problem I have with this is that although masculinity is primarily a biological trait (simply the manifestation of androgenic expression on a physiological and behavioral level), the usage of the word has been warped by extreme conservatives/religious groups/homophobic communities to be used as a means of discrimination as a false illogical rationale for why men who have sex with men are less deserving of respect and opportunities. And that, is completely reprehensible. Once again, your casual comment, perhaps because you feel sexier if you roleplay as a subhuman creature or whatever, is irresponsible, and absolutely none of us should ever tolerate this talking point because quite simply it has a very real effect on our day to day lives  

Edited May 5, 2022 by rock-cock-jock