Tops becoming always more agressive and rough

[IntoBBvisitor]

2 hours ago, hungry_hole said:

Tops use whatever they need to get turned on and hard. So I don't blame him

Neither I don t blame them at all. I m just wondering what are the causes of these changes... I noticed it in my personnal experience and I notice it in porn too... Tops tend to become everytime more demanding and assertive.

[hntnhole]

On 2/25/2026 at 12:44 PM, Njn0mc said:

It is not fun when you have to recover for a long time due to the aggressiveness of the top.

It's neither fun nor anywhere near to appropriate.  Corporal distress can be a useful tool, provided the Top knows what he's doing.  When that's simply not the case, it's downright dangerous for the sub.  

I don't know how a sub bottom could get the notion that just because a man says he's this or that, it's actually the case.  In the case of Bd/Sm sex, that 'acceptance' of a statement as Whatever's Truth is downright dangerous.  

This is why I beat the drum occasionally (in appropriate threads) about the boy insisting on a negotiation well before any 'scene' is to take place.  NO man, particularly a sub, is nothing but a piece of breedmeat, regardless of whether that concept raises a sweat on one's brow.  It's downright fukkin dangerous for a boy to merely accept as fact what any man says when it comes to corporal distress.  Boys simply need to insist on what's called a "negotiation-of-limits" meeting well prior to the actual event.  A boys well-being, both physically and definitely emotionally depends on more than mere talk, it depends on taking the man's measure in person, wherein things such as limits, acts that are desired, acts that aren't, can be negotiated between the two equals, since until the scheduled moment the scene begins, that's exactly what they are.  Tops that mistreat bottoms in an attempt to bolster their own weaknesses are beneath contempt.  

When two men meet, become acquainted, and grow close enough to establish a more regimented relationship, that's one thing.  Until that point in the relationship is reached, however, it's up to each man to pointedly describe any sexual acts he's not comfortable with, and that means it's forbidden at the upcoming scene.  Any man, T, b, or in between that won't accept those parameters is simply not trustworthy, and should be avoided.  

Every so often, when I lived in Chicago, there would be several murders, particularly in the highrises along the lake on the east end of boystown.  And none of them needed to happen, but they did happen because some bottoms seem to think they have zero agency, when that is the farthest thing from the truth.  Each man has equal agency while negotiating limits, what will happen during the scene, what will not, etc etc.  

Pardon the rant, but I wonder if anything other thing under the sun pisses me of more than losing men of tremendous value, merely because they don't believe they own just as much agency / value as any other man up to the moment a negotiated Bd/Sm scene commences.  😠

[NHeat]

I'm a Dom too who likes to play rough. With that said, I also like vanilla fun from time to time (especially if the guy is hot). Both people need to clearly lay out what they're looking for and hold each other to those boundaries. There are plenty of men who will play with you how you want. Don't settle for those who won't.

[TightBott7]

Very interesting comments on this thread, let me add my own perspective.  Maybe what's happening is that this subject is now being discussed more in the open and not necessarily that it's  happening more often.  These public discussions may encourage dom tops to be more aggressive and sub bottoms to be more submissive and take it.  In my own experience  dom tops have realized how submissive and willing to please I was and actively tried pushing my limits, many times successfully.  Ultimately, it became a process whereby I challenged myself as to how much I coud take and to focus more on pleasing the top. And that's what really got me off sexually.  But it was and continues to be a a very gradual process, more like a journey the top and bottom join together.

[hntnhole]

Thanks, TightBott7, for that interesting addition to the conversation.

When a man identifies as a Bd/Sm/Leather bottom, that doesn't mean he's a "submissive" in every other aspect of his life.  A man that loves submission sexually may very well be the loudest-mouthed guy at some other, non-sexual event.  

The entire point is, each man has equal agency up to the moment the negotiated scene commences.  Then, the limits agreed to by both men become tantamount to law - not to be broken, but to be observed and respected, since any other behavior would reflect most poorly on the one who "broke" the negotiated rule, and physical injury may be another of the outcomes. 

In other words, the shame of becoming known for breaking limits would inhibit either for doing so.  These groups are - mostly because of the dearth of men committed to this kind of sexual life - closely knit, and nothing passes faster than one guy saying to another "did you hear what X did to y? "  We need to make sure he's (the victim) ok ....

I don't understand why .....

16 hours ago, TightBott7 said:

 These public discussions may encourage dom tops to be more aggressive and sub bottoms to be more submissive and take it.

 ...... that could be the case.  Doms (as opposed to Tops that are naturally somewhat dominant) simply don't want to allow any deviation from what they've agreed to because it will demean themselves in their own eyes.  More, when word gets out that they're irresponsible, so will their opportunities in the future.  They know that disregarding limits negotiated by the bottom (whatever they may be) is dishonest and a shame on their reputation.  What Dominant man would want to be known for breaking negotiated limits?  Each of these more rarified "communities" - B/d, S/m, Leather - are relatively tightly-knit, like a "brotherhood", and the last thing any guy would want to be known for (within his own community) would be the shame of breaking a negotiated "limit".  The "enforcement" aspect of the limits is self-generated, since word always gets out when some guy breaks a negotiated limit. 

Finally, a negotiation is merely that.  If neither man involved can commit to honoring an agreement, then obviously they go their own separate ways.  That's a far better outcome than someone getting seriously injured, merely because they mistakenly think the "scene" has already begun, and he has no agency at all.  

I don't believe that many Tops of any configuration want to be known for dishonest behavior.  After all - Tops need bottoms, they're precious to us.  Without bottoms (regardless of the specialties" we're discussing here), where would we Tops be?  

[yoursinmine]

I obviously have no experience about what it used to be, I've only been fucking for a year. In my experience, I don't think it's an age thing. I've been surprised in both directions--you really can't judge a book by its cover. 

I like it rough and all the things that go along with being a sub. I love a good hate fuck, but at the end of the day everyone I've been with understands that we all want to keep up our chosen lifestyle going. Maybe that's just because my bf is good at screening, I don't know, but I've never been injured. Sore, absolutely, but I'm not sure that can be avoided in a gangbang, even if you were fucking gentle little bunnies. 

If anything, I want it rougher and harder most of the time.