You forgot asexual!hooksashands said:
In all seriousness though, I agree with you. I still can't see the difference between bi and pan. Why does the differentiation have to be made?
Annoying stereotypes about my sexuality.
- Thread starter LogicArmour
- Start date
Recommended Videos
In all seriousness though, I agree with you. I still can't see the difference between bi and pan. Why does the differentiation have to be made?
The implication of the wikipedia article, insofar as what it says about pansexuals, as well as the some of the defenses and clarifications used by the OP, is that pansexuals are sexually transcendant. Which further implies that all homosexuals and bisexuals, as well as all heterosexuals regardless of their attitude towards nonstandard sexual orientations, are narrow minded bigots unable to see past gender, should we accept the pansexual's premise. I think the implication that homosexuals, and a large number of heterosexuals (and don't forget bisexuals) who thought themselves open minded and\or tolerant is, first of all, incredibly snarky and in fact if pansexuals actually hold this attitude then it should be no suprise that it would be anathemic to the rest of the world getting used to them.
-shrug- todays society is very strong in social groups and since sexuality is such a major part of the human life it would naturally become identified by what you want in life?AngloDoom said:
Plus we as humans need to name EVERYTHING.
so.. if I like my guys a little feminine and my girls to be a little tom-boyish does that make me pansexual? I don't think so.. Cause I don't want my guys to have breasts or my chicks to have pricks.. (can we say dicks here, I know lots of people are immature about it, but whatev)
I have a friend who's identifies herself as a pansexual.
We go to the nude beach together, hang out and each cookies, watch my little pony, and basically do a lot of very fun stuff. She taught me about surreal art, and I treasure her friendship.
Do I agree or disagree with her definitions... well... maybe, maybe not. But if I argued with her about a sexuality I don't know (or don't care) about, then that means I'm taking up time I'd rather use to do fun things, see above.
Frankly, life's too short to quibble about what other people desire to do with their own bodies.
We go to the nude beach together, hang out and each cookies, watch my little pony, and basically do a lot of very fun stuff. She taught me about surreal art, and I treasure her friendship.
Do I agree or disagree with her definitions... well... maybe, maybe not. But if I argued with her about a sexuality I don't know (or don't care) about, then that means I'm taking up time I'd rather use to do fun things, see above.
Frankly, life's too short to quibble about what other people desire to do with their own bodies.
lol I would prefer that, too many people copy who/what is "cool" or look up to and its sad. Individuality is something that one should be proud of, not cover up with a mask.Vegosiux said:
I didn't even know pansexual existed, but it describes my sexuality perfectly. Thankyou OP!
But yeah, I don't really like the whole 'you're either gay, or you're straight' mentality.
There is a broad spectrum of sexuality in my opinion.
Something like this maybe?
I don't deny that some homosexuals are really feminine. But that's in the same way that a lot of straight people are really feminine.
Some gay people are masculine too...
People need to get their head around the fact that gay people are in fact as normal as straight people... It's just a certain thing called Christianity that seems to have set the idea of homosexuality, and bisexuality back a few trillion years.
But yeah, I don't really like the whole 'you're either gay, or you're straight' mentality.
There is a broad spectrum of sexuality in my opinion.
Something like this maybe?
I don't deny that some homosexuals are really feminine. But that's in the same way that a lot of straight people are really feminine.
Some gay people are masculine too...
People need to get their head around the fact that gay people are in fact as normal as straight people... It's just a certain thing called Christianity that seems to have set the idea of homosexuality, and bisexuality back a few trillion years.
I fully concur with the OP. I find that homosexuality is inaccurately portrayed in the media as something that is ultra-feminine, and I think a lot of homosexuals seem to embrace that stereotype more than they should.
It's really quite refreshing to see somebody within the LGBT community stand up and remind me that the media is full of shit, that "the stereotype" isn't actually accurate at all, and that (with the obvious exception of their sexual preferences), LGBT individuals don't really behave any differently than their heterosexual counterparts.
It's really quite refreshing to see somebody within the LGBT community stand up and remind me that the media is full of shit, that "the stereotype" isn't actually accurate at all, and that (with the obvious exception of their sexual preferences), LGBT individuals don't really behave any differently than their heterosexual counterparts.
As far as I understood it it's:
Heterosexual: attracted purely to the opposite gender.
Homosexual: attracted purely to the same gender.
Bisexual: attracted to the same and opposite genders but not intersex [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex].
Pansexual: attracted to all genders, including intersex [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex].
Heterosexual: attracted purely to the opposite gender.
Homosexual: attracted purely to the same gender.
Bisexual: attracted to the same and opposite genders but not intersex [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex].
Pansexual: attracted to all genders, including intersex [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex].
I agree, I'm straight and even I find the limp-wristed, neckerchief wearing, perfect grooming brand of gay guy to be inaccurate in describing all or even most gay or bisexual guys. One thing I never got when I was more naive was if guys acted like girls to get guys, wouldn't their relationship fail, as a guy wants a guy right? I think the normal guy who just happens to like guys is becoming the more accurate and accepted portrayal of gay guys.
Yeah, I'm gonna have to agree with this. I generally go by bisexual and now, apparently, I need to start calling myself pansexual because I also like trans-whatevers (fucked if I can remember which term is an insult and which PC this week), androgynous and G-NOS (which is a term I just made up for Genders - Not Otherwise Specified, based on on the term PDD-NOS). None of which I ever felt were excluded from the working definition of bisexual.hooksashands said:
Can't I just be a human attracted to humans? Or not? Always with the fucking labels. And people get angry at you when you incorrectly identify yourself according to their local terminology too. I don't keep up with this shit, because it's really not that important to me, so I don't always know the new words. Maybe I should just start calling myself asexual, so I can stop giving a shit.
Still looks a helluva lot like bi to me.
I mean... both sexualities would sleep with someone from either gender right?
If I invented a sexuality and went around saying 'hey, I'm Xsexual, I like women but its not the same as being straight because bla' I'd just get a funny look.
Not really with you on this one mate, sorry.
I mean... both sexualities would sleep with someone from either gender right?
If I invented a sexuality and went around saying 'hey, I'm Xsexual, I like women but its not the same as being straight because bla' I'd just get a funny look.
Not really with you on this one mate, sorry.
It's hard not to read posts like this as "different is bad," and that's not much different from homophobia.thevillageidiot13 said:
There is no such thing as bisexuality (in the 50/50 sense). For that matter, there is no such thing as straight. Everyone works on a spectrum and I am of the belief that literally no one is 100% straight or exactly 50% attracted to both sexes.
I love women. A lot. I mean, daaaayumnnnn I love women. But I get along perfectly well with gay/bisexual men/women, and find other men attractive at times - sometimes to the point of sexual fantasy. Would I ever act on that impulse? No, because I think buttsex is gross, and I'm not thrilled about the feeling of stubble against my lips, or junk, or really any part of my body. But I am occasionally visually stimulated by other men, and I believe there is nothing wrong with that, it's perfectly natural, and most men that can't say the same are either lying or delusional.
Also agree with original poster - most non-"traditional straight man" guys don't fit the respective stereotypes.
I love women. A lot. I mean, daaaayumnnnn I love women. But I get along perfectly well with gay/bisexual men/women, and find other men attractive at times - sometimes to the point of sexual fantasy. Would I ever act on that impulse? No, because I think buttsex is gross, and I'm not thrilled about the feeling of stubble against my lips, or junk, or really any part of my body. But I am occasionally visually stimulated by other men, and I believe there is nothing wrong with that, it's perfectly natural, and most men that can't say the same are either lying or delusional.
Also agree with original poster - most non-"traditional straight man" guys don't fit the respective stereotypes.
See my problem with pan-sexuality is that it simply doesn't make sense. I'm not one of those who thinks you can't possibly be attracted to someone undergoing sexual reassignment or a transgendered people in general. I'm not even one of those people that think that a persons mental gender has to be restricted to male or female. I'm one of those people who use logic.LogicArmour said:Dear Everybody (especially females),
Sex in the City and other similar, shitty TV show are not an accurate portrayal of how the average LGBT man acts. Just because I appreciate dick doesn't mean my tastes or behaviour will be any less masculine than a straight guy. Please get this through your skulls, it's starting to get on my tits.
On a related note (this time for everyone), Pansexuality is not bisexuality. Stop saying it is. When it gets to the point where I lie about my sexuality for the sake of simplicity, something has gone very wrong.
For those unaware as to what pansexuality is here's a wikipedia article.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pansexuality
The more you know people,
David (Pansexual)
P.s. I'm actually in quite a good mood at the moment, just thought I'd give a PSA
So, ranting aside, does anyone else have this problem?
Gender can be defined multiple ways. The most common is the binary system of man and woman based upon primary sexual characteristics along with genotype on occasion. Some people don't like this classification and decided that their gender was going to be based upon a mental state, whether one views themselves and man or woman. Others continued this trend, and decided that they didn't fall neatly in the binary states of men and women and decided to treat gender as a spectrum instead of a binary state. From this the pansexual was defined as someone who was attracted to the entire range of this gender spectrum.
However there is no reason to stop at a one dimensional line for gender. You could theoretically make a 2D,3D,4D,InfiniteD spectrum that could completely classify a human beings "gender". That is on this infinite dimensional spectrum each human being is an individual point. Gender at this point becomes a complete description of the person, rather than a rough generalization of character traits.
Here arrives the problem of pansexuality, its either to complex of a term for what it describes, or a literal impossibility. Pan roughly translates to all or everything. To say your attracted to all people should mean that you are attracted to them regardless of where they lie on the spectrum. As I already described once you begin to branch to a mental state as a definition of gender rather than the physical or at minimum a body image of the physical there are only arbitrary points to stop before you are offering a complete description of the person.
Thus if you are pansexual (and believe in a gender spectrum which is a default) you are essentially saying you are aroused to some extent by every human being on the planet. The fat, the skinny, the youthful, the old, the assholes, the nicest people, and so forth. Once they reach sexual maturity you are attracted to them. No one is attracted to everyone else on the planet, even if the exceptions are people who commit mass genocide.
Now if you have a binary system, or even a binary spectrum (what is most commonly used by self-proclaimed pansexuals) bisexuality is adequate describe what you are talking about. Bisexuality means "I like two gender points (Male and Female)". If that person believes in the mental gender definition that would mean I like the characteristics of both gender identities as well. As no human being possesses solely the mental characteristics of one gender then by definition everyone is in some form or another mentally a mixture of both genders. Thus stating that you are attracted to people across the spectrum in terms of mental characteristics is redundant.
Remember the point of stating your sexuality (or anything) to others it to best convey meaning to them as you can. Not everyone believes in a gender spectrum and thus saying you are pan-sexual doesn't mean anything to them. Bisexuality they may be able to grasp as every person believes that there are at least two gender states, and thus they can still get an idea of your sexuality. A person who does believe in a spectrum will get what you mean by I'm bisexual as I described above. If you feel it necessary explain that you are attracted to the entire spectrum.
Now at this point you may think I'm being too nit-picky about definitions and meaning and thinking to much about it. Many would say the same to you insisting about pan-sexuality being different than bisexuality. I apologize if I didn't explain something clearly as I must now attend class.
It's hard not to read posts like this as "different is bad," and that's not much different from homophobia.thevillageidiot13 said:
I used to consider The Escapist to be a forum full of nice open-minded people, that was a fair while ago. Is it so hard to accept that someone wants to identify as a certain sexuality before bashing their head with a rock and asking why?
I don't fully understand Pansexuality either but there's no need for such hostility, I'm not going to say "that doesn't make sense, you're wrong" if I don't fully understand it.
From my understanding Pansexuality is about a particular way of thinking; when you're bang in the middle of the Kinsey scale you get the added bonus of thinking "why does gender matter?".
I've noticed a lot of Pansexuals have trouble understanding other sexualities, and other sexualities have trouble understanding them, thus they have created the divide between Pansexuality and Bisexuality.
And to the people saying that OP is whining, you don't know about the shit that some lgbt folk go through. For me being gay has always been a piece of cake, but for someone in America for example it can get a whole lot worse. If you're subject to any sort of discrimination I think you're entitled to the occasional rant.
I don't fully understand Pansexuality either but there's no need for such hostility, I'm not going to say "that doesn't make sense, you're wrong" if I don't fully understand it.
From my understanding Pansexuality is about a particular way of thinking; when you're bang in the middle of the Kinsey scale you get the added bonus of thinking "why does gender matter?".
I've noticed a lot of Pansexuals have trouble understanding other sexualities, and other sexualities have trouble understanding them, thus they have created the divide between Pansexuality and Bisexuality.
And to the people saying that OP is whining, you don't know about the shit that some lgbt folk go through. For me being gay has always been a piece of cake, but for someone in America for example it can get a whole lot worse. If you're subject to any sort of discrimination I think you're entitled to the occasional rant.