#and that fandom is really bad about conflating 'bottom' with 'sub' and 'top' with 'dom'

[trekkiedean]

I've said this before but I can't find it right now so: the real answer to top/bottom discourse is that they are both vers unless there's a scenario where it would be really funny if one of them is the designated top or bottom.

[bambi-kinos]

people’s arguments about why john has to be a bottom and not paul tend to regurgitate the same critique these people have about paul (“you say he’s a bottom just because he’s feminine!”) by bringing up john’s appearance and more femme attitude after ‘68 and then saying how paul is more masc because of his body / facial hair. i also feel like a lot of people still conflate dom/sub with top/bottom when it comes to mclennon. though i haven’t thought about the societal perception of receiving / giving, i had an ohhh moment when i read that in your post. i personally will always be a fan of service top john paired with a power bottom paul, but john being servicy to me doesn’t mean he’s “submissive” in the typical way. i think he can be dominant and aggressive with paul but that’s because paul allows him to be. like what you said about paul enjoying being john’s second and being put in his place by more domineering and strong men. there’s a lot of power play that goes on in their sexual relationship and it deeply fascinates me!

people’s arguments about why john has to be a bottom and not paul tend to regurgitate the same critique these people have about paul (“you say he’s a bottom just because he’s feminine!”) by bringing up john’s appearance and more femme attitude after ‘68 and then saying how paul is more masc because of his body / facial hair.

Yes, it gets very transparent for exactly those reasons. What makes me roll my eyes about the “you say he’s a bottom just because he’s feminine!” thing is that anyone who bitches about this can only imagine switching the roles and having Paul by a hypermasculine stoic (which breaks characterization) and having John be a hyperfeminine bottom (which is also OOC). I don't think that the original complaints are necessarily a bad thing, there is an iteration problem in McLennon fandom where Paul can sometimes be reduced to a weepy princess, though I haven't heard of any fics coming out in the past 5 years that actually made this mistake. But it does annoy me that fandom can only imagine flipping the script and having John be the weepy bottom princess. It never leads to something more creative or interesting being produced where John and Paul's roles, both self assigned and imposed on them, are discussed especially for the effect it had their relationship.

It would be interesting to explore John's femme qualities but I think that fans are hesitant about going there because they would have to admit that John's passivity in 1968 was induced by his heroin addiction which destroyed his life and his relationships. There's never any appreciating John's femininity when he wasn't on heroin even though 1965 is arguably when John was at the most soft spoken and open minded. I find it a little sad that John's feminine qualities are only appreciated when he was at the peak of his hatefulness and addiction.

i also feel like a lot of people still conflate dom/sub with top/bottom when it comes to mclennon.

A lot of that is wish fulfillment IMO. Especially since Paul fans are usually the ones driving it and it's pretty universal that we want to see him get railed, not really the other way around. We like him because he's so poundable. So it's nice that he has a built in boyfriend who's willing to fuck him until he cries, you know. And it's easy to classify that as top/bottom::dom/sub.

McLennon is very subtle in some ways because of the give and take between John and Paul was so weird and it's just really difficult for us as outsiders to grasp. John and Paul themselves are baffled and confused by it. It makes me wonder if part of their dissolution was the fact that they didn't understand how much power they held over the other one which meant that they couldn't understand why their decisions were having such profound effects on the other person. They seem profoundly frustrated and bewildered by the undercurrents of their relationship where they perfectly fulfill each other in all ways except one, and how deeply unsatisfying their other relationships have been in comparison.

I think @amoralto damaged the fandom for this in some ways because she ended up having a popular blog which meant that her interpretations of John in particular were xeroxed over and over. The problem with this being that I don't think amoralto fully appreciated the power dynamic between John and Paul and her bias against John crept into her opinions which means that they screwed up the fandom discourse. If you go purely by her public posts then amoralto appears to be under the impression that John was a hysteric that was perpetually shitting himself about Paul one upping him. There is some truth to that but it's also not the whole story because Paul's ability to pull the rug out from under John was always a source of pride, fascination, love, and eroticism for John. Yesterday rocked John's world but he was also proud of Paul for being such an incredible artist and he was always pleased about being the one who discovered Paul. He was always aware that Paul had a lot of power over him and John both reveled and despaired in that.

This relates to the top/bottom::dom/sub thing because this dynamic would naturally play out in an erotic relationship between John and Paul. There's the surface layer where John is railing Paul but then there's the additional layer where Paul is the one enticing John to do it by showing his ass off (like really, who do you think those tight cut trousers are for?) and inviting John to put his cock inside Paul. And then there's the part where John's butch attitude and even some of his violence was egged on and encouraged by Paul who was most likely turned on by John punching people out. Paul was not the slightest bit put off by John being a violent person or else he would have bailed within a year of knowing him. When Julia died, Paul is the only one who had patience with John who was getting drunk and getting into fights…meanwhile there's a femmeboi in the background making soothing noises and cleaning him up so that he's fit for company. Really makes the your mind run wild with possibilities huh? Who is to say Paul didn't say "c'mon Johnny, just put it in me mouth and I'll fix you up." Or something!

The point is Paul is ultimately in control of the situation. This is supposed to be what dom/sub set ups are supposed to be anyway, subs are the ones who dictate the conditions in the bedroom. But considering how John built Paul up in his mind, it seems clear that Paul had a lot of overt power over John too. They don't fit neatly into the dom/sub set up either.

They switched power positions constantly and they got a lot of pleasure out of dominating but also being dominated. Paul liked being on top and being on bottom and John liked it when he got to be on top of Paul and when Paul crushed him. The pleasure was in the struggle itself, not necessarily the positions in of themselves.

though i haven’t thought about the societal perception of receiving / giving, i had an ohhh moment when i read that in your post.

It's not nearly as prevelent now though it still lingers. But heteronormativity really dictated the nature of a lot of relationships in the past.

i personally will always be a fan of service top john paired with a power bottom paul, but john being servicy to me doesn’t mean he’s “submissive” in the typical way. i think he can be dominant and aggressive with paul but that’s because paul allows him to be.

IMO there's a lot of truth to this! @zilabee has a really nice post about how John and Paul could afford to be gentle with one another and wrote love songs together. I think that a service top john/power bottom paul really fits this dynamic because it allowed John and Paul to express themselves to each other which solidified their mutual trust and their bond.

In a lot of ways Paul was an ideal partner for John in that he was someone John could have sex with that didn't have consequences (such as pregnancy) while Paul also had the feminine beauty that John really loved. (There's a quote from Yoko I think that John claimed if he fell in love with another man then that man would have to be extremely beautiful. Handsome is not enough.) John could probably be a lot rougher with Paul who could stand up to being tossed around a bit if needed but was beautiful enough for John to fuck tenderly too. Paul wasn't afraid of John's rough side and even encouraged it and decided to love it. In some ways John being a service top lets him express that roughness sexually with someone who won't break in half from being treated like a sack of potatoes. And there wouldn't be judgment from Paul either because he is still a man and experienced the same puberty and testosterone that John did including the same struggles with temper, the bodily changes, etc. He knows where John is coming from whereas a 1960s woman would not. (The transwomen, crossdressers, and homosexuals in Hamburg may have been John's first explicit taste of this. People who were familiar with what growing up as a male would be like so they didn't judge John for his proclivities and interests.)

In other words, John could express himself sexually with Paul in a way that he probably couldn't with women. Paul was fine with it judging from that photo of John's nutsack against his back and it fulfilled his needs as well!

like what you said about paul enjoying being john’s second and being put in his place by more domineering and strong men. there’s a lot of power play that goes on in their sexual relationship and it deeply fascinates me!

Yes! John overwhelms and dominates Paul but it's because Paul wants it to happen. He relied on John's intuition and discernment and ultimately his trust in John to carry it through. John has a partner who can't get pregnant when he climaxes inside him and then can take it on the chin when John is rough and/or degrading. All while he's sharply aware of how much Paul likes it which itself feeds into John's eros, and so on and on…

[genuflecting]

I've had a bunch of things circling around my head for days and they don't seem to want to leave on their own, so I'm going to try writing them out in a long post that no one had to read, but if you're nosy like me you're welcome to and I promise the bad vibes can't past it past the readmore, you can check them at the door

the guy I like wasn't at the party I went to last weekend and no one there even had his contact info (I got brave and asked the person who I thought knew him but it turned out to be a dead end) so now I have to wait for the group's every other month party and hope he turns up to that, which will probably be a Halloween party so that'll be an interesting extra element. I've just been so hung up on it cause my attraction to people in real life is so incredibly rare and I want to act on this, but it feels so out of my control and if I'm this sad at not seeing him for two months I'm gonna be REALLY really sad if four months later I still don't see him. I wish my taste in people was broader so I could just. not feel so lonely!

I think the loneliness/striking out has mutated alongside dysphoria into me feeling extremely dysmorphic and sad lately, which I like a lot less than my hopeful new outlook I had for the few months before that

I'm feeling very tired of being misgendered absolutely constantly in public, and especially of feeling like my mom just sees me as "woman lite". I almost wish she just saw me as a man, but I specifically don't identify with a binary gender because I don't want people to lug in all their gendered baggage and assumptions and bury me in them, so instead I'm stuck with not being seen as a man at all.

The dysphoria seems to have been fanned by not seeing that guy at the party and feeling insecure about that, but especially by the interaction at said event where (someone who is also nonbinary) made weird and gross biologically essentialist comments (cited in another post, man I wish tumblr had citations honestly, I know I'm a fucking nerd but how fun would that be, anyway). I went through a period of feeling way more confident in my body and how my gender (and sex, frankly) are congruous with my identity and that I can be a gay guy who isn't questioned or dissonant, and that just felt so regressed by that interaction and my doubts of how people perceive me and, by extension of anxiety, how the guy I like might see me.

Seeing a post where someone in the comments conflated dom/sub with top/bottom and also made the most "clearly hasn't had sex, doesn't know what they're talking about" reference to being a "top in real life, bottom in bed" and vice versa and I just wish I could make people stop using all of those terms if they don't know what they mean. oh, you're anally receptive in your daily non-sexual life? No wonder being on tumblr set me back with my understanding of sex and relationships, people just talk about it with zero grounding in reality

Then seeing a guy refer to "transition scars" in a piece of art's replies (where the cis male artist gave a character very tired vine patterns in place of top surgery scars) and then I went to the commenter's blog and his bio said that he's distrustful of fandoms predominantly made up of women fetishizing m/m ships, ie all of them, and I'm just like Man, way to do one of the worst things you can do for trans men while claiming the most superficial support. the way I still have to reassure myself that that's not what I'm doing when I experience attraction to another man as a man, because of fear mongering arguments like that.

Lastly in the vein of maybe I should stop opening the notes of posts at all, is seeing someone claim that the "mauraders fandom" is a "totally separate" fandom from the hateful wizard books and not related, thus they shouldn't be accused of promoting transphobic work, and someone had to break down for them exactly how stupid that argument is. The fact that they're apparently telling themselves that explains why the acquaintance I know who I already wasn't comfortable being friends with because she still goes to Catholic church with her family was comfortable referencing reading mauraders fanfiction while knowing she was in front of a trans person. It was just so much to realize the fact that this is just a continuation of the same bullshit people have been spewing for years about death of the author, in front of my trans literature major ass who has actually read roland barthes and knows that's not even kinda what the essay is about.

Anyways I'm tired, trans, and angry, and I would just like some critical thought, gender affirmation, and gay sex as a treat.