Talk:bottom
RFD
The following information passed a request for deletion.
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
Rfd-redundant: The LGBT and BDSM senses seem redundant. DCDuring TALK 15:55, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
- No personal experience to draw on, but they look like the same sense. I don't see why 'bottom' couldn't be applied to any man or woman in any sexual/romantic relationship. Was it perhaps Facts707 who added this sense? He may be able to tell us (if it was him). Mglovesfun (talk) 16:15, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
- An absence of reasoned opposition after a decent interval (one week?) should be sufficient to justify merging the two. DCDuring TALK 16:29, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
- Facts didn't add the sense, he added the context label to the sense. Still, if he (she?) is around he might be able to help. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:36, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
- An absence of reasoned opposition after a decent interval (one week?) should be sufficient to justify merging the two. DCDuring TALK 16:29, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
- In BDSM it's used in contrast to (deprecated template usage) top (the dominant partner), but perhaps in gay sex it relates to the bottom, i.e. the buttocks whose anus is being penetrated. Just speculating. Equinox ◑ 19:00, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
- How is the LGBT a redundant sense exactly? As far as I'm aware it's usage is probably increasing. Just search "top or bottom" in google and the first result is a gay website. —JakeybeanTALK 19:14, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
- "Redundant" doesn't mean it doesn't exist: it means it's already covered by another sense. e.g. for ball, "a sphere used in football" is redundant to "a sphere used in sports". Equinox ◑ 19:18, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
- I see. Then I say keep the sense otherwise you're labelling all gay people as sadists/masochists. The LGBT term is used purely to describe who prefers doing what as obviously with gay sex there are only two options (giving/receiving), whereas the BDSM term is related to a desire to be dominated. I assume. Much too young for this sort of discussion. —JakeybeanTALK 19:25, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
- "Redundant" doesn't mean it doesn't exist: it means it's already covered by another sense. e.g. for ball, "a sphere used in football" is redundant to "a sphere used in sports". Equinox ◑ 19:18, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
- How is the LGBT a redundant sense exactly? As far as I'm aware it's usage is probably increasing. Just search "top or bottom" in google and the first result is a gay website. —JakeybeanTALK 19:14, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
- Oh dear. In my world this is a common word as apple or football. Keep - that sense is totally different to the BDSM one, as Jakeybean has explained. ---> Tooironic 21:47, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
- Brings me back to my question above, can this not be used for heterosexual or lesbian couples too? Mglovesfun (talk) 22:04, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
- I don't think it is totally different. Both seem to describe a sexual partner who "receives" rather than administers. The two contexts can be explained within the definition, but I would keep it all on one sense line. Ƿidsiþ 07:43, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
- When a gay man says he's a bottom he's communicating something very specific - that he prefers to be penetrated rather than be the one who does the penetrating - that doesn't necessarily have anything to do with submission or roleplay, since one can be a "power" or "active" bottom. By your logic, we should join "a religious clergyman" with "Mormon priesthood holder" at priest, "the act of placing the object into the goal" with "points scored in a game as a result of placing the object into the goal" at goal, "the management of money and other assets" and "the science of management of money and other assets" at finance, etc. But we wouldn't because those distinctions are what make good dictionaries. ---> Tooironic 21:28, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
- Can the wording be improved without making the definition overly precise and long (and thereby much harder to attest)? Even if it can't be at the moment, having this explanation in the Talk page should help. DCDuring TALK 22:17, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
- Nobody's tried to answer my question. Mglovesfun (talk) 01:40, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
- I have, sort of. I can understand it being applied to Lesbian couples; in the use of strap-ons one woman could definitely be referred to as the 'bottom' and the other as the 'top', because one could easily be the either... whereas in a heterosexual relationship it's kind of a given that the woman will be the 'bottom' therefore they're never referred to as bottoms. Any heterosexual relationship where the woman somehow penetrates the man would be a really uncommon fetish and I'm sure would come under a different term if one actually exists. It's definitely a huge part of the gay lexicon which I think should be addressed. —JakeybeanTALK 02:02, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
- Nobody's tried to answer my question. Mglovesfun (talk) 01:40, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
- Can the wording be improved without making the definition overly precise and long (and thereby much harder to attest)? Even if it can't be at the moment, having this explanation in the Talk page should help. DCDuring TALK 22:17, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
- When a gay man says he's a bottom he's communicating something very specific - that he prefers to be penetrated rather than be the one who does the penetrating - that doesn't necessarily have anything to do with submission or roleplay, since one can be a "power" or "active" bottom. By your logic, we should join "a religious clergyman" with "Mormon priesthood holder" at priest, "the act of placing the object into the goal" with "points scored in a game as a result of placing the object into the goal" at goal, "the management of money and other assets" and "the science of management of money and other assets" at finance, etc. But we wouldn't because those distinctions are what make good dictionaries. ---> Tooironic 21:28, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Kept, enough reasonable doubt. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:40, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
Agriculture
I believe that each individual element in a gang plow is called a bottom. See the Wikipedia entry for "plow." It uses the word bottom in this sense but without really giving a definition.
RFC discussion: January 2011–October 2017
The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for cleanup (permalink).
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
The two subsenses of the main sense are almost completely unintelligible IMO. DCDuring TALK 15:52, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
- See also #top, here for the same reasons. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:46, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
- Looks good now --P5Nd2 (talk) 10:57, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
RFV discussion: April 2021
The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for verification (permalink).
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
sense: "Someone who takes a position physically below their partner during sexual activity." Colin M (talk) 14:42, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- Speedily deleted, see also talk:power bottom.__Gamren (talk) 18:56, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
The far end of somewhere
I’ve added a new sense ‘the far end of somewhere’ as when people talk about someone or something being at the bottom of the garden/street/road they don’t usually mean the lowest point of the place they’re referring to nip it the point that is furthest away (a garden could be slanting upwards away from you and it’s end would still be called the bottom of the garden. Overlordnat1 (talk) 10:11, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Doublet?
Why is this in "English doublets"? There's no doublet listed here and I can't find any doublet of the word. STIK2009 (talk) 23:23, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- It’s a doublet of the German word ‘Boden’ but not of the world’s Greatest English surname ‘Boden’, so I’m not sure 🧐 Overlordnat1 (talk) 15:30, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- The category is being added by the mention, buried in the middle of the second paragraph, that fund ultimately descends from the same root as bottom does. - -sche (discuss) 16:38, 28 April 2024 (UTC)