Your thought on... Pansexuality

[Mechamorph]

Let's get personal here. I use to consider myself straight and fought feelings but in the past few years... decades, I've grown attraction to guys too. Heck, I have dated and been with guys before. Para in denial. Well, he was. So I accepted myself as bi but then when I discovered the pansexual definitions, a thought came into my head think, "am i that?" But really I am just one who doesn't care about a person's gender or sex and would just find attraction with anyone really. I just didn't want to label it.

My advice to you is not to let labels or categories define who you are. You do not need them so long as you are happy with yourself. You love who you love and if they love you back (in a safe, sane, two consenting adults kind of way) who cares about what sort of relationship it is? Just bask in the happiness of two (or more) people having found each other in this crazy world of ours. As I tell my students " the important things in life are simple, figuring out what they are is hard".

 

[Silvanus]

Well, no, not really. Body shape has nothing to do with sex, meaning biologically assigned. Someone who has had sexually reassignment surgery hasn't changed their sex, meaning both chromosomes, and their sexual reproductive ability. A womb hasn't been implanted, or testicles haven't started producing sperm.
And there's nothing churlish in that either. Can they produce sperm? Eggs? Can they give birth? Do they even have the necessary biological structure to do that, regardless of functionality? And those are black/white yes/no questions, not open to debate and personal identification.
That's not rude, those are legitimate question to ask someone who says they have changed their biologically assigned sex.

Those are indeed black/white questions, but none of them apply to everyone of either particular sex, so cannot reasonably be called definitive.

In truth, sex is largely a descriptive term, ascribed through a large set of characteristics-- many of which, though not all, are changeable. The inability to change some does not invalidate the idea of change, because none are indivisible or fully definitive.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

SNIP

To be fair I did say the person can just have the biological structure, regardless of functionality. So a woman who doesn't produce eggs still have ovaries and a uterus, regardless if it works or not. Same with men and testes.
And those who have both are defined as someone who has both. Those with none, likewise, clearly defined.

And I would argue that yes sex is a descriptive term, but what it describes is finite and genetically codified, and not really changeable. People can change genders and sexuality, sure. But sex, without genetic treatments(including altering DNA) and stem-cell grown organ implantation, isn't something that can be changed. And without putting too fine a point on it, yes, the inability to change something does in fact invalidate the idea of changing it. Or, if not the idea as a general concept, meaning a thought, then it at least invalidates the practical means of the change itself.
People can self-identify as anything, sure. But that's all it is, a self identification. How you personally choose to believe yourself to be. Science and biology are not obliged to agree with that.

 

[Saelune]

Let's get personal here. I use to consider myself straight and fought feelings but in the past few years... decades, I've grown attraction to guys too. Heck, I have dated and been with guys before. Para in denial. Well, he was. So I accepted myself as bi but then when I discovered the pansexual definitions, a thought came into my head think, "am i that?" But really I am just one who doesn't care about a person's gender or sex and would just find attraction with anyone really. I just didn't want to label it.

My advice to you is not to let labels or categories define who you are. You do not need them so long as you are happy with yourself. You love who you love and if they love you back (in a safe, sane, two consenting adults kind of way) who cares about what sort of relationship it is? Just bask in the happiness of two (or more) people having found each other in this crazy world of ours. As I tell my students " the important things in life are simple, figuring out what they are is hard".

You define your labels, labels dont define you. I think labels are good when used to relate to people and for understanding. I am trans, I am a gamer, I am a nerd. These are used by me to let others understand me and to relate to others.

The problems arise when other people define your labels (ya know, like anyone who uses the term "special snowflake"). People telling other people what they are, thats the issue.

 

[Redlin5_v1legacy]

Well, I do love my Cast Iron but... Not that much. I mean, to ea-

OH!

Um, identify as you want as long as you're not hurting people.

 

[TakerFoxx]

It's a thing that's not me, ergo whatev.

 

[Silvanus]

To be fair I did say the person can just have the biological structure, regardless of functionality. So a woman who doesn't produce eggs still have ovaries and a uterus, regardless if it works or not. Same with men and testes.
And those who have both are defined as someone who has both. Those with none, likewise, clearly defined.

And I would argue that yes sex is a descriptive term, but what it describes is finite and genetically codified, and not really changeable. People can change genders and sexuality, sure. But sex, without genetic treatments(including altering DNA) and stem-cell grown organ implantation, isn't something that can be changed. And without putting too fine a point on it, yes, the inability to change something does in fact invalidate the idea of changing it. Or, if not the idea as a general concept, meaning a thought, then it at least invalidates the practical means of the change itself.
People can self-identify as anything, sure. But that's all it is, a self identification. How you personally choose to believe yourself to be. Science and biology are not obliged to agree with that.

I didn't say that the inability to change something doesn't invalidate the idea of changing that thing, note; I said that the inability to change some characteristics does not invalidate the idea of changing sex, when sex is not rigidly defined by those specific characteristics, but rather an aggregate of various others as well, including many changeable ones.

Personally, I'd consider chromosomes to be one of the emptier metrics. They aid in determining sex at the developmental stage, but not exclusively (or even perfectly; many variations exist). They're useless to the layman, and we're discussing the layman's use of terminology.

I do appreciate that you recognise self-identification, though, and that our discussion is largely technical. I don't intend to moralise. & happy new year!

 

[DudeistBelieve]

I don't.... fully understand how its any different than say Bisexuality or whatever. My gut reaction is just people making up more words again to be different.

Which I should stress, like if yo different then cheers on you. You do you and all that.

it just feels needlessly complicated and reductive to force labels on things like gender and sexuality. I feel theyre more fluid than people realize.

 

[DudeistBelieve]

Let's get personal here. I use to consider myself straight and fought feelings but in the past few years... decades, I've grown attraction to guys too. Heck, I have dated and been with guys before. Para in denial. Well, he was. So I accepted myself as bi but then when I discovered the pansexual definitions, a thought came into my head think, "am i that?" But really I am just one who doesn't care about a person's gender or sex and would just find attraction with anyone really. I just didn't want to label it.

I know you're not seeking this, but good for you buddy. Don't overthink what you are in relation to others too much, it doesn't really matter.

 

[Foolery]

I know I am going to regret asking this. What other genders are there beyond male and female? From my experience, what I see is people just making stuff up just to make themselves feel special and unique. For the sake of civility, I'll refrain from saying the term that people uses to describe such people.

None, if we're being honest. Gender is binary, just like sex. And gender does not vary independently from sex. 99.7% of people who are male, identify as male, and vice-versa. In that same fashion, people who are transgender are either trying to transition from male to female or female to male. Sexuality however, well, that gets a tad subjective. Everyone has preferences, fetishes, attractions, etc.

 

[happyninja42]

I've operated under the Michael Stipe concept of sexuality. "What you do with your junk is none of my business unless one of us is sitting in the other person's lap"

Beyond that, if it's consensual, I don't care. My only concern with pansexuality, and large lover groups, is that it seems to increase the amount of relationship drama exponentially. I've known a few people who were pansexual, and were in a multi-person relationship, and the group dynamics never gelled 100%. She really liked Guy A, but Guy B was someone she liked, but not LIKED liked. She also was civil around Girl B, but they didn't agree on a lot of things, so they would tend to get on each others nerves, which would bother Guy A, because he really liked Girl B, and this caused Girl A to get upset, which would upset Guy B, etc etc. Not saying this is a certain thing, but every relationship has it's problems, and with more people, you get more problems. Beyond that aspect being a concern I see, fuck whoever you want, I don't care. Have fun, stay hydrated, and the safe word is snuffalupagus

 

[McElroy]

Who a person is is too fluid nowadays, and so I won't give a thought until I get an actual relationship presented to me. For example Saara Aalto (2nd in last year's British X-Factor) dates a woman -> that's a lesbian relationship though she had had a boyfriend for years. A friend of mine was "pretty sure" she would never fall for a man yet she's engaged to one now -> they're in a straight relationship.

What people label themselves or say they are doesn't give much to work with. And ex-relationships aren't that interesting to talk about. I think that's nice and simple. We don't choose who we love and so on. Just be wise about that non-choice, alright?

 

[Silvanus]

it just feels needlessly complicated and reductive to force labels on things like gender and sexuality. I feel theyre more fluid than people realize.

Well, in that case, isn't pansexuality the least restrictive label there is? It's almost saying you're open to whatever. It's not describing a limit of oneself like heterosexuality and homosexuality are.

 

[Neurotic Void Melody]

Let's get personal here. I use to consider myself straight and fought feelings but in the past few years... decades, I've grown attraction to guys too. Heck, I have dated and been with guys before. Para in denial. Well, he was. So I accepted myself as bi but then when I discovered the pansexual definitions, a thought came into my head think, "am i that?" But really I am just one who doesn't care about a person's gender or sex and would just find attraction with anyone really. I just didn't want to label it.

It takes a certain amount of courage to be open and honest on these matters online that can open oneself to a lot of unnecessary hassle from ignorant people, that is admirable by itself. But it also helps share understanding to those who may think only negative connotations with the "label" due to only thinking from their own experience. All this talk of "special snowflake" sounds more like bitter projection of personal insecurity unable to utilise empathy than any useful intelligent insight.

 

[Just Ebola]

As a term, I think it's wholly unnecessary. When someone identifies as bisexual, they can appreciate and be attracted to both genders. So it stands to reason that anyone who falls between male and female can be found attractive by said bisexual person (depending on their personal quirks and preferences).

I guess I'm of the camp that thinks it's a trendy term that exists primarily to make certain people feel even farther removed from the "norm". But I guess it doesn't help that every single person I've met who identified as 'pansexual' was an overweight girl with a punky haircut, who liked to exclusively date other girls of... lets say a similar visage.

It doesn't really affect me too much, but I wouldn't mind if it dropped from common parlance. And that's coming from a bisexual guy, who doesn't mind the peas touching the carrots. (In between genders, I actually don't like peas.)

Oh hey, my first post of 2017.

 

[MrCalavera_v1legacy]

I have yet to find a reason why i should use it instead "bisexual".

 

[DudeistBelieve]

it just feels needlessly complicated and reductive to force labels on things like gender and sexuality. I feel theyre more fluid than people realize.

Well, in that case, isn't pansexuality the least restrictive label there is? It's almost saying you're open to whatever. It's not describing a limit of oneself like heterosexuality and homosexuality are.

Eh... yes. I suppose so.

I just think it's like saying one is forming an anarchist group. If Anarchist's organize don't they cease to be anarchists? It's that sort of deal.

It just sort of strikes me as this girl I knew high school. Wore the punk rock clothing, had the dyed hair and did everything to be considered and make everyone well aware they were different.... This is just me personally, but I resent that kind of attitude. THe flashyness of it. Because their are actually are people in this world who are different, and that shit just makes it harder for them to deal with it.

But that's just my opinion, being someone whos... different myself.

 

[KissingSunlight]

You define your labels, labels dont define you. I think labels are good when used to relate to people and for understanding. I am trans, I am a gamer, I am a nerd. These are used by me to let others understand me and to relate to others.

The problems arise when other people define your labels (ya know, like anyone who uses the term "special snowflake"). People telling other people what they are, thats the issue.

I guess this is where you and I differ. I believe self-identification is harmful. It's elevating one aspect of your personhood as the whole being. Also, these self-identification are used to separate people from each other. I'd rather identify as a "human being". I like to relate to other people as human beings. Not as whatever label they like to call themselves.

I can obsess over my sexual and gender hangups (I do have a lot, but I really do not want to share them with an anonymous internet forum, or with anyone actually.), and self-identify with a laundry list of terms. I don't feel it would do me any good. It would unnecessarily stigmatize me. It would do nothing to help me with my issues. Instead, it would serve to separate me from everyone else.

You like who you like. Nobody cares. Unless, you are doing something harmful to another person.