Yeah I mean I sort of understand what you're saying but I'm sure there are plenty of "straight" or "bi" people who are in relationships with transgender people, do they then have to say they're actually Pansexual because they fell for a transgendered person and if that's the case isn't that insulting to their transgender partner?

Don't you start as well.

I think Ammi has a point with the posts she made over the page jack, you are the only person I see in this thread being rude and insulting.

but there are gay people and str8 people who are also attracted to some transexuals, so that doesn't work as a definition. There are a lot of str8 guys who are attracted to trans women. Havn't you seen The Crying Game?

Yes but I consider myself bi and I genuinely wouldn't care. And I'm willing to bet a pay check that more than half of bisexual people would too

I never said that. I'm just saying that from the way I understand it or how it's been explained to me, the physical relationship isn't something that's a big deal to them.

Well I guess so, I'm just saying how I understand the term. I think they still would have a physical relationship but it's something that matters a lot less to them.

there's lots of straight, gay and Bi people who don't have sex as high on their list of priorities as well though

That's the Wikipedia definition for pansexuality. In short, it says it's more about the person rather than their body which attracts them.

But that's true for a whole lot of people, straight, gay or Bi imo. I wouldn't be with someone just for their body, it's completely about the person.

It's just a different way to say bisexual tbh.

http://i.minus.com/ibvmrm7irgmmJM.gif

I know. It's a hard thing to get your head around at first but it makes sense once you do. There is a difference really.

I can't see it and tbh it's kind of insulting to straight, gay and Bi people to say that we don't "see the person" and are only attracted physically to people.

Me too, but I still think pansexuality is somehow different from that. :shrug: It's just how I see it in my head. It's a separate thing. It might be very similar to others but it's just slightly different to my mind.

I didn't realise before that not only are Asexuals not attracted to either gender but they also don't even have a desire to masturbate. And approximately 1% are Asexual.

Also there is something called Demisexual, it's called that because it is between sexual and asexual and describes people who can only have sexual desire for someone if there is an emotional connection. So I guess they're unable to have casual sex.

And Pansexual does seem almost like a political correct way of saying Bisexual. But also I could see where Pansexuality might been seen as something that discriminates, by the way it suggests that trans people are of neither gender, when in fact trans people do belong to one of the genders.

So in a way I do find it tough to see it as a separate sexuality, because to me Bisexuality perfectly describes people who label themselves Pansexual. Being gender-blind is being Bisexual.

There is also a term called Polysexuality and it's the attraction to multiple genders and/or sexes :shrug: "may be attracted to transgender people, third gender people, two-spirit people, genderqueer people, plus people who are intersex," (from wiki). However once again that is what Bisexuality means to me, it's an umbrella term that mean you're attracted to all genders.

I don't think Demisexual, Pansexual and Polysexual are actually separate Sexualities along side Homosexuality, Bisexuality, Asexuality and Heterosexuality. I think they're more a sub clarification of how you label yourself.

That's how I would see it too Claudia. Great post btw.

Thank you :love:

My head hurts.... haha. I'm demisexual... I hate on hetrosexuals, sooo mainstream :idc:

lol, Demisexual :laugh: I mean fgs, plenty of people don't have casual sex, that does not make them of different sexual orientation to a straight person (if they're straight) who does have casual sex, that just getting ridiculous

Well forgive me for finding insulting remarks about somebody's feelings offensive, I'm terribly sorry, how awful of me.

As for the posts Ammi made, I can see the possibility that the 'hipster' comments were just jokes, but this post:

Is not in anyway intended to be humorous. It is a serious post belittling those it is directed at and devalues their personal feelings and experiences, implying that actually no, these aren't the ways some people feel about themselves and wish to identity themselves, instead it's just a fashionable lifestyle choice to make them look cool, unique and edgy. That is insulting and nobody is going to tell me otherwise. This forum is riddled with double standards at the best of times but this is taking the piss, had that comment been directed at bisexuals, or any other sexual orientation for that matter, the reaction would've been remarkably different and the comment would have been dealt with. It's only acceptable because it's not a commonly known, used or understood label or preference so it's as if it's open to be insulted. There is nothing wrong with being inquisitive, but passing somebody's feelings (which they may be struggling with or have struggled with) off as a way of being 'different' is quite offensive to those it is aimed at.

lostalex got it right, people are free to label themselves and define their sexuality in any way they wish. People have the right to take an interest if they want, but not to pass critical judgements upon them. It's completely out of order. Nobody understands somebody else's true feelings, only the person experiencing them does.

The problem is Jack that no one seems to be able to give a proper explanation as to how Pansexuals are any different to Bisexuals. If there was a clear difference there would be no confusion, how can you expect people to respect this "different" sexual orientation when as far as I can see there is no difference at all

Theres that word again, stop being so offended by everything then peoples views won't sound so offensive jack.

I will later, I'd be quite happy to. Again though I'm not totally clued up on it either but will try my best to explain.

But just because there's confusion and people are struggling to understand the difference that gives nobody the right to disrespect the way somebody wishes to view themselves, I'm sorry but it doesn't. Question all you like in a polite manner, passing things off as ways of being 'different' just insinuates it's some easy little choice for attention, which is quite hurtful.

People can label and define themselves how they wish, it's nobody else's places to criticise them for doing so. There may be no difference to you but if there is to other people then you need to respect that and treat them as you would treat anybody else.

Saw your post Jess, not surprised it's been deleted. But thank you for understanding anyway, it's boosted my confidence a little that some people can remain respectful. I was beginning to feel disheartened that it's just me and Reece who are seeing this the same way. Appreciate it a lot :love:

It's funny because in the early stages of this thread I praised this forum for being diverse and largely open-minded, funny how things change eh. It's a shame.

Jack you are choosing to take offence, and then being rude on the back of that.

If a Bisexual is someone who doesn't care what gender someone is, then how is Pansexual any different?

Being open minded is trying to understand things, which is what we are trying to do, I'm not going to blindly agree with something that makes no sense. You've just said yourself Jack that you can't even explain to me what the difference is but you're still saying that there definitely is a difference.........

Oh and btw, you're calling Jessica respectful for calling half the people posting in here idiots but Caitlin is disrespectful for saying Pansexuals are trying to be different.....ok then