There may be cultural differences affecting your communication. It could be that you're accustomed to being deferential in this situation and your supervisor is

There may be cultural differences affecting your communication. It could be that you're accustomed to being deferential in this situation and your supervisor is accustomed to students being more vocal about their preferences. Does he know you dislike the research direction he's advocating, or could he be too busy or distracted even to be aware of it? Are you sure he's forcing you and not just making suggestions? Assuming communication isn't the problem, how clearly have you defined the scope of the research you want to pursue? If you don't at least have an outline for your thesis having been there for three months, maybe he's justifiably worried about a lack of direction on your part and is trying to give you some. The more clearly you have it planned out, the more comfortable your supervisor should be with having you run with it. Assuming communication isn't the problem and assuming you've presented a well thought out plan that he rejected, you should take a hard look at whether he has a point. One school of thought holds that Ph.D. is a time to do what you like without worrying too much about how fashionable it is, but another regards a poor choice of dissertation topic as career suicide. What reasons does he have for you to work on those topics instead of the one you had in mind? I know what it's like to be passionate about a research topic, and although you don't believe this now, your interests are subject to change as you mature intellectually. My own view is that a Ph.D. is neither a free-for-all nor a matter of life and death, but your opportunity demonstrate your competence with a decent piece of work and start your career. The main thing is to do a good job and not get too hung up on things that don't matter in the long term.