Gay men who prefer non-penetrative intimacy are challenging the idea that sex must fit a top, bottom or versatile template. The growing use of “side” offers a clearer way to describe those preferences, while the debate around sidephobia asks a bigger question: why should anyone have to defend the sex that feels right for them?

Essential Takeaways

  • A side is a sexual preference: It generally describes gay men who don't want anal penetration, while still enjoying intimate, active sex lives.
  • There are plenty of alternatives: Kissing, oral sex, touching and mutual masturbation can all be central to satisfying sex.
  • The label fills a gap: “Side” gives people language beyond the familiar top, bottom and versatile categories.
  • Pressure can be real: Dismissive questions and assumptions may make non-penetrative preferences feel abnormal or temporary.
  • There isn't a winning position: Sexual comfort, consent and pleasure matter more than fitting a recognised label.

Gay sex doesn't need one default setting

The strongest point in the sidephobia debate is also the simplest: not having anal sex doesn't mean not having sex. For some gay men, intimacy is built around kissing, oral sex, touching and mutual masturbation, with no sense that anything is missing.

That distinction matters because sexual labels can quietly become social expectations. If top, bottom and versatile are treated as the standard menu, anyone outside it may be pushed to explain themselves. Research indexed by PubMed has explored how sexual identities and preferences can connect with comfort, wellbeing and personal agency, rather than being reduced to a single act. [2]

The result is a useful reminder that sex isn't a checklist. A soft kiss, a lingering touch or the easy familiarity of knowing exactly what you don't want can be just as meaningful as penetration.

What does “side” actually mean?

“Side” generally describes a gay man who doesn't engage in anal penetration but does enjoy other forms of sexual intimacy. It isn't shorthand for celibacy, inexperience or a lack of desire. In many cases, it's simply the most accurate description available.

The term became more visible because the usual labels didn't work for everyone. Joe Kort, a psychotherapist and sex therapist, has written about coining “side” after finding no clear category for men who didn't identify as tops, bottoms or versatile. PubMed-listed research has also examined the term as a distinct way of describing non-penetrative sexual behaviour. [3]

That language can be reassuring. Dating apps often ask people to compress complicated preferences into a single word, so having a label that feels honest is practical, not dramatic. Your profile shouldn't need a footnote explaining that “not into penetration” doesn't mean “not into sex”.

Why sidephobia feels familiar to some men

“Sidephobia” may not be a formal clinical diagnosis, but the attitude behind it is easy to recognise. It can appear through jokes, disbelief or the familiar interrogation: have you tried it, are you sure, and might you change your mind?

Those questions can sound harmless, yet repetition gives them weight. When one preference is treated as something to overcome, the person holding it can begin to feel as though they're failing a test of gay identity. Studies in sexual health and identity have examined how social expectations can shape comfort, disclosure and wellbeing, helping explain why these interactions may feel more serious than casual teasing. [4]

This doesn't mean every awkward question is deliberate prejudice. Some people simply haven't thought beyond the categories they know. But curiosity still needs boundaries, particularly when the subject is someone else's body. “No” is a complete answer, and “I don't want that” doesn't require a persuasive argument.

The dating-app label is useful, but not magic

Giving “side” a place in dating culture can make introductions clearer. Grindr added the option in 2022, allowing users to signal a preference that had often been left out of the standard top-bottom-versatile framework.

That change won't remove every awkward conversation. People can still ignore profiles, push for something different or assume a label is negotiable. Still, clear language helps people find one another, and research on sexual identity categories suggests that labels can support communication when they reflect lived experience rather than impose a rigid script. [5]

For anyone dating as a side, the practical rule is straightforward: state your boundaries early, but don't feel obliged to write an essay. For anyone meeting a side, take the label at face value. If preferences change, the person will say so; they don't need a sales pitch.

No sexual preference needs a trophy

The answer isn't to turn “side” into a new gold standard. Tops, bottoms, versatile men and sides all deserve the same freedom to define what feels good, safe and wanted. One preference doesn't need to defeat another.

The more interesting shift is towards sexual language that leaves room for variation. Some people may identify as sides permanently, while others may use the term flexibly or prefer no label at all. Work indexed in sexual-health research has linked consensual intimacy with autonomy and wellbeing, reinforcing the idea that the quality of an encounter matters more than whether it follows a familiar pattern. [6]

That leaves a fairly uncomplicated conclusion. If two adults are happy, consenting and enjoying themselves, the rest is mostly background noise. As gay dating becomes more open about different forms of intimacy, the hope is that “side” will feel less like a defensive explanation and more like an ordinary option.

A good sex life doesn't need to look impressive from the outside.

Source Reference Map

Story idea inspired by: [1]

Sources by paragraph: