I wish someone had told me this as a young queer person, so let me just remind you that making “Bottom/Top” interchangeable with “submissive/dominant” is both inaccurate and also enforcing heteronormativity.
Since, at its core, heteronormativity is based on a binary idea that one partner is active, assertive, and “masculine,” while the other is passive, receptive, and “feminine.”
So by doing the same thing to queer sex terms, you’re recreating the same kind of hierarchy without explicitly naming it as male/female.
The sexual role (who penetrates vs. who is penetrated) becomes like a stand in for gendered power roles. it pushes this idea that one person should control or hold power, while the other should yield (mirroring traditional heterosexual norms!)
Being a “top” or “bottom” is about what someone enjoys physically, not necessarily their preferred power dynamics. It’s putting people in a box where bottoms are assumed to be passive, or emotionally vulnerable and tops are assumed to be assertive, stoic, and/or controlling. This totally limits how people can express themselves.
Plus, misogyny, since, in heteronormative frameworks, the “active” role is valued more than the “passive” one. When that logic is mapped onto queer sex, topping can be seen as more powerful or desirable, while bottoming is sometimes stigmatized or feminized (how many times have you heard “bottom” used as an insult?)
PLUS, many people don’t fit neatly into these boxes (e.g., vers, switch, or people whose preferences change depending on context). The rigid pairing of position with dominance/submission makes those fluid identities harder to recognize or validate.
REMEMBER, QUEER RELATIONSHIPS ARE ABOUT BREAKING AWAY FROM RIGID GENDER ROLES
