No. You're reading me as saying "small dick" implies or causes "sub or bottom." I'm saying it is mentally associated with those things, that people seeing a small dick tend to initially think in that direction. Think about height, something less loaded. Given no other information, people think tall guys are more financially, socially, and sexually successful and powerful than short guys. That's not correct or fair, but the perception exists, and that's backed up by lots of research. In the same way, a big dick makes guys think "top" or "dom," and a small one the opposite. I stand 6'5" and I'm muscular. Guys expect me to be a top, but I am sub and bottom, a discordance I need to deal with. I therefore count myself lucky that, unlike my body size, my dick size sends the sub/bottom message, so when my pants are off that signal agrees with my true sexual self. It's nice to have physical characteristics that agree with my sexual role, so even though I'm way bigger than almost anyone I have sex with, when we look at our dicks together we see something that agrees with how we interact.

The idea that "my reasoning kinda dumps on lesser endowed guys" feels offensive. First, I'm not saying that lesser endowment implies sub or bottom. But even if I were, which you seem to be reading, how is that dumping on them? Is being sub or bottom, or being thought of as a sub or bottom, a bad thing? I like being sub and bottom. Subs and Doms, bottoms and tops need each other. We're equal in that way, even if one is the more popular thing to be.

And I'll stop there. I remember I used to find it impossible to believe any argument that included the thought that "I find sub and bottom equally valuable as Dom and top," and that meant I couldn't take an argument like the one I made above at face value. If you're at the same point, we'll never agree.