There's no demographic more oppressed than straight male bottoms.

What the fuck is a straight male bottom

>>81493428
castrate him at a young age, or give him puberty blockers and put him on hrt immediately.

>>81493428
A man who exclusively has sex by getting pegged.

>>81493428
A "straight" guy who wants to get fucked in the ass

>>81493407 (OP)
i am a feminine, passive, straight man. we unironically are the most oppressed, gays have other queers while normal gender conforming straights see us as gays despite being straight.

>>81493486
Your destiny is to become a transbian, sorry to say

>>81493407 (OP)
tsmt. both biological foids and trannies alike find straight bottoms repulsive at best and closeted faggots/trannies at worst which really is a gross mischaracterization of us and only serves to accentuate our struggle. its a shame what few dominant females there are in the world are either prostitutes or lesbians with very little exception

>>81493407 (OP)
Men should be divided into roughly equal communities of "tops" and "bottoms," such that the "bottom" half is removed from the dating pool and workforce. This would improve life for everyone involved, including bottoms.

>>81493528
i cannot troon out because my parents wouldnt accept their only child being a tranny and i live with them.

>>81493553
>such that the "bottom" half is removed from the dating pool and workforce. This would improve life for everyone involved, including bottoms.
and what are we bottoms supposed to do...

>>81493407 (OP)
Average 2k25 couple

>>81493741
You're supposed to fill the same role as women. Serve and obey men.
>but I'm not gay!
Lots of men aren't gay. You don't need to have sex with him, just take care of his other needs and let him do the difficult things like making decisions.

>>81493769
>You're supposed to fill the same role as women. Serve and obey men.
hmph I would have taken that deal in a heartbeat when I was in college.

>Lots of men aren't gay. You don't need to have sex with him
gay sex is pretty gross

but I have two other questions: how am I to find the correct man to serve and obey if bottom males can't "date" and also how are people to know I'm a bottom male when I'm out in public?

>>81493769
>just take care of his other needs and let him do the difficult things like making decisions.
i want this. i am a total failed male who could never find a girl thanks to autism so why not turn myself into a wife for a superior man? i would take estrogen and wear nice dresses and make myself a cute housewife for some real man.

>>81493852
>superior man
Saaaar you're brown

>>81493852
fuck why did this image get me hard i dont want to be a fucking faggot

>covert thread to psyop impressionable and sad guys

>>81493868
>>81493852
It is OVER for you niggas dude wtf
LMAOOOOOOO

>>81493829
>how am I supposed to find this correct man to serve if bottoms can't date
Sorry, to be clear: bottoms don't date WOMEN. They can date men for sure. In this family structure, a closed relationship would involve four people. There would be a top served by a bottom and two women (two because it keeps the gender ratio equal).
>how are people to know I'm a bottom male?
I hadn't really thought of that. I didn't think it was important to identify bottoms immediately. But if you need to do that, then I guess you can wear a collar or something.
>>81493852
Failed men have no place in modern society. My system offers them a loving family and a lifestyle that frees them from the shackles of labor.

>>81493945
Saaaar please stop larping

>>81493960
would you please stop bumping this thread, saar

>>81493945
what do you think about forcing bottom men to crossdress?

>>81493962
I love your tiny indian pp too much for thay

>>81493862
huh? i am serbian, not a jeet.

>>81494010
Silence cigan i know who you are

>>81493963
>forcing bottom men to crossdress
I do like the idea of taking away their autonomy, but that might be an example of how the fact this is my fetish infringes on the substantive benefits of this system. I'm not sure that it would actually make anyone happier or make the world a better place to control what bottoms wear.

>>81494030
That said in this system bottoms are basically property so if the man wants the bottom to crossdress then he would have to

>Got excited there might be straight male bottoms here
>Check inside thread
>Actually just gay male bottoms
Maybe one day they'll show up.

>>81494060
So a straight male bottom is a guy into pegging? How can you say you're "oppressed" for your kink? Just don't tell anyone about it.

>>81493945
>Sorry, to be clear: bottoms don't date WOMEN. They can date men for sure
well see this is important because us bottom males would have to, in some way, signal that we were bottom males so that we could find guys who were looking for their bottom to serve them. For instance, I would 100% be placed into the bottom category even though I'm rather tall. I suppose once I've found my top to serve then it's fine if people don't know what I am but until then...? and actually as a bottom if I wasn't allowed to date women, there would have to be some sort of indication that I was a bottom and not allowed to date them.

>>81494123
I mean, how do gay couples start dating if they don't know which is the top and which is the bottom? That's why I didn't think it was important. But I see your logic. I think that crossdressing and/or wearing a collar would work.

>>81494150
>mean, how do gay couples start dating if they don't know which is the top and which is the bottom?
well the bottom males typically adopt feminine mannerisms and dress "flamboyantly" but you can't really tell the top males apart from straight guys quite a lot of the time.

From my personal perspective, I'd rather be forced to crossdress than dress as a gay flamer.

I think the collar should be reserved for when I find my top though?

and another question! how do they decide which half of men become bottoms?

>>81494185
>I think the collar should be reserved for when I find my top though?
Yeah I realized that was stupid as soon as I posted, you're right
>how do they decide which half of men become bottoms?
This is something I've been wrestling with. It can be either consensual or nonconsensual. The nonconsensual model isn't really compatible with my goal of making the world a better place, but the consensual model would probably produce too few bottoms. I earnestly believe that a MUCH larger portion of men would agree to be bottoms if it were destigmatized, though. I think a lot of men fail at being "traditionally masculine" and if we didn't pressure them to constantly struggle and fail at masculinity then they'd be a lot more open to embracing femininity. So basically men could just choose to be bottoms. I know this isn't a perfect system, but I think it would roughly work. Another thought: we can test men at some point in their life to determine whether they are tops or bottom by measuring metrics such as their intelligence, physical strength, sociability, and virtue. At this point they could be assigned "top" or "bottom." If we normalized the top-bottom dichotomy, then men would accept their role as just an innate part of who they are, the same way they already accept things like their race or sex.

>>81494266
>The nonconsensual model isn't really compatible with my goal of making the world a better place, but the consensual model would probably produce too few bottoms.
For me, my life would have been better even if I was non consensually feminized. I would have wholly embraced it, but yes I'm probably an outlier. I failed miserably at being traditionally masculine, and wanted nothing more than to be somebodies cute stay at home gf. If I had the ideal body for it I probably would have.

So I think a world where half the men were bottoms and submissive would indeed remove much of the stigma. Men would understand this, the problem at the moment is women don't accept that, but perhaps they'd be more willing if there were 3 "genders" or whatever: male, female and bottoms and each had their own spaces so that bottom males weren't in womens spaces where we don't belong.

>>81494060
Has been a while since i saw that vid/webm, still hot as ever

>>81494379
a girl who actually knows how to fuck is impressive. most strap on vids are a bit...janky I guess

>>81494356
I definitely conceptualize this system as creating a new gender. Unlike women, men can be both active AND passive participants in sex, so it doesn't make sense that they're classed as just one sexual role.
I am against trannies, for a similar reason to you. I believe that a lot of people assume that when a man takes on a passive role, he "becomes" a woman. In fact, I think he becomes a new thing, neither man nor woman. It is impossible for a man to become a woman, and if he tries, he will only bring misery to himself and others. I believe that is in fact happening in the trans community today.
The big issue is how we actually achieve this in a world where only a small portion of men (like you) are willing to be made into bottoms. As I said, I think it's wrong to do it with force. I think the best option is to have a second sexual revolution, where we start with a small community of people who live in the four-person family unit I described and that as people see how preferable that is, the culture shifts until it becomes normal. I'm considering writing a story based on this idea, and in that story there is also a class of people who don't participate, and everyone just lets them do their thing because who cares? They're not allowed to hold power though, that's reserved for tops.

>>81494393
>are a bit...janky I guess
And how's that a problem?

>>81494423
Yes, I think creating a third new gender would be the solution. As you say, men can never become women no matter what their mental illness tells them, but we can be "feminine males" I suppose you could say.

It seems there are almost always a large portion of men who don't breed, and most of these "men" are probably feminine males along with a few weirdos. Perhaps one of the tests for becoming a feminine male is lack of success with females?

I think that perhaps, while some men like me would willingly embrace our bottom role and willingly give up power, some failed male types might want to just be left alone to do their own thing. Do you think they should become bottoms or just left to live their life?

I'd be curious to read your story, anon...

>>81494508
Lots of older societies have roles for fags such as choir boys, administrative eunuchs, bureaucrats and wahtnot.
In this modern world with the less need for male workers (farmers. industry, soldiers) and more need of fags (bureaucrats, computer programmers, social assistants) we should have a more ternary view of gender, and start feminizing more boys for the future roles (we sorta of do that with programming trannies).

>>81494508
>Perhaps one of the tests for becoming a feminine male is lack of success with females?
Probably not, women shouldn't be trusted deciding who gets to have sex or not. Part of the motivation for this is to put that power back in men's hands.
>Do you think they should become bottoms or just left to live their life?
Well, they would become bottoms for sure, but that wouldn't necessarily obligate them to be in a relationship.
>I'd be curious to read your story
Unfortunately I only got the idea to write it yesterday, so I don't know when (if ever) it will actually exist. But I appreciate the support.

>>81494550
This is true actually, bringing back these type of roles would be good for society. I don't know if I agree about feminizing boys though...I kind of still think we should be given the opportunity to prove ourselves if we really wanted to

>>81494574
>Probably not, women shouldn't be trusted deciding who gets to have sex or not
This is probably true lol but I meant that perhaps males in school who don't have much romantic success should be "encouraged" to pursue classes meant for us bottom males?

>Unfortunately I only got the idea to write it yesterday
What gave you the idea of this story anyways?

>>81494628
>What gave you the idea of this story anyways?
I was thinking about how works of literature like 1984 are sometimes more effective for promoting social change than nonfiction works with the same message, and I realized that more people would be interested in my worldview if I presented it as a narrative.
>perhaps males in school who don't have much romantic success should be "encouraged" to pursue classes meant for us bottom males?
hmm, maybe. I'm not sure at what age we should make the distinction.

>>81494628
It would be a process in which we observe their behavior in the first years of school. The more masculine and responsible boys go to manly careers, and the faggy + violent boys go through the feminization eunuch path. As estrogen decreases violence in maladaptive males, and increases performance and well-being for the more submissive ones.
There would be less stigma in being a tranny or taking hormones, and society would prosper.

>>81494652
that's true, stories are always the best way to present new ideas. I guess the question is where did you get this worldview?!

and yeah I sort of think that when the distinction is made would be very important. In high school I probably wouldn't have been enthused about being a bottom male, but in college a mere few years later I would have whole-heartedly embraced it.

>>81494670
I don't know, trannies should be banned I think. Feminine males are one thing but we'd be more like a third gender, as we were saying.

>>81494704
Trans women are not women, they are trannies. and should be identified as such.

>>81494712
to make this work properly, trannies are banned, and the word tranny is removed and replaced with something better that doesn't have the stigma that trannies do.

The new feminine male gender would be a powerless, submissive role for us bottom males, and would include boys who were interested in the feminine and those who weren't, but were indeed bottoms still. None of this "you're a real girl" nonsense anymore

>>81494704
>where did you get this worldview?!
I just reasoned it out from the fact that men have so much trouble finding partners these days. One of the easiest ways to raise demand for a good (in this case, male lovers) is to decrease supply. If only half of men mate with women, suddenly those men are expected to have TWO wives, not just one, which radically shifts things in men's favor. I realized, of course, that this would be painful for the other half of men, so I devised the top/bottom system to provide incentives for them to consent to it.
The fact that I'm bisexual and have a slavery fetish probably influenced my thought as well.
>when the distinction is made
I agree. I think there is a contradiction here because below a given age (say, early 20s) you're too young to really know what you want or what's best for you, but above a certain age (again, let's say early 20s) you're running out of time to fit into your proper role, and you're quickly becoming less attractive/feminine. I think that it would be really tricky to hit the sweet spot in between these two extremes. One thought that's occurring to me as I write this: there's no reason it should be the same time for every male. Maybe there should be a minimum and maximum age to get tested, and men can choose themselves when to do it?

>>81493428
a future transbian

>>81494953
i am a submissive straight male and i would troon but i cant because i live with my parents

>>81493486
This image hits the AGP like a 12 gauge.

>>81493852
You should have your balls taken too once a man claims you. Nothing but a limp, estrogenized excuse for a penis tucked cutely between your legs while the only sperm in your body is what your owner is pumping in to you

>>81493428
A homosexual that wants to pretend he's straight

>>81496364
Still, your sperm should be frozen and preserved so that we can raise a next generation of failed maels cocksleeves, even prettier than the last.

>>81493407 (OP)
dont use our terms you faggot

>>81494931
that's a good point, so many fewer men are even trying to get girls these days anything to improve things would be ideal. and for me, girls did find me attractive, even though they'd always wanted to do girly things with me. so as a bottom male I'd be one fewer competition out there for the Tops. What are some of the incentives for the bottom males though??

and yeah I think that's why it might be ideal to "encourage" bottom males to think about their potential future even when they're young and maybe not sure what they want yet. Nothing set in stone maybe but perhaps a gentle nudge, maybe a slight encouragement from the hot girls to wear maybe a skirt one day to class cause it'd be cute...

>>81497292
what kind of girl would want to raise a failed male though..?

>>81493407 (OP)
i cant wait to be dead. i hate this existence

>>81493576
:internethug:

>>81497792
The whores who's job is to pleasure cock, and instruct other cock pleasures.

>>81497927
I'd be strangely proud of seeing my son(female) be such a pretty little thing growing up, even if he were destined to follow in my footsteps!

>>81493407 (OP)
We should leave the rats alone.

>>81494010
Buck broken by BGC (Big Croatian Cock)

>>81493407 (OP)
i'm the most oppressed demographic,
i'm being oppressed constantly by tranny propoganda.
By normal goys and their government that requires me to pay fees just to have a safe place to live.
I have to work every year and talk to people i don't want to talk to.

You. Owe. ME.

>>81497744
I made a general to discuss this since there seems to be some interest about it, you can find it at >>81498902
Anyway
>as a bottom male I'd be one fewer competition out there for the Tops
It's an interesting situation, because I believe a lot of bottoms have no shot at getting women, but the mere fact that they exist creates a greater supply of men to date and therefore disrupts the dating market. Our current system is a lose/lose.
>What are some of the incentives for the bottom males though??
I can think of a few. For one, I think a lot of people really are naturally submissive and would prefer the safety and comfort of obeying and serving someone else to the responsibility and stress of making difficult decisions. A lot of people say this is why they like to submit and I can understand it. Life gets easier for bottoms in terms of labor as well. The top is expected to provide for the family - the bottom might work, but all of its income is supplemental. It doesn't have to stress itself at a difficult job to support a family, it can just be a househusband. Further, all of the benefits conferred on society at large would apply to the bottoms, too. Further, most bottoms would never be in a relationship otherwise, but this way they get to be a part of a loving family unit that cares for them. And all the benefits of society at large apply to them too - they would enjoy living among gradually more and more competent people as only the tops pass on their genetics and only the tops fulfill the high profile jobs.
>I think that's why it might be ideal to "encourage" bottom males to think about their potential future even when they're young
I'm worried that this coercion might not be conducive towards happiness.