Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet (Post 10001330)

absolute bollocks, just people trying to satiate out basic desire to feel important, same as pretending to see ghosts or talking to spirits. It just makes the person feel important and that people are interested in them

:joker:

Originally Posted by parmnion (Post 10001352)

Can a childs persona attract them?

Originally Posted by montblanc (Post 10001360)

i think you missed the point

Originally Posted by parmnion (Post 10001372)

Thats why i am asking a question thanks.

Originally Posted by Withano (Post 10001314)

Your understanding of pan is different to mine.

My understanding of bi, is that gender matters. They are sexually attracted to men because they love cock (etc) and women because they love tits (etc), whereas a pansexual can love both of these genders, but not because of their genitals. Genitals arent a factor that they consider when searching for a companion, which is unlike bi people.

Bi people are sexually aroused by men and women, whereas pansexual people do not care if they are men or women, they are instead aroused by their persona, and gender would therefore not matter.

I dont even know if that makes sense, but I cant make a third paragraph on it, thats so extra.

Bi loves men and women because they are men or women, pan love men and women because they are people that they like.

Originally Posted by Oliver_W (Post 10001374)

It's just word vomit. A straight person might love tits, but fall in love with a flat chested woman because he loved her personality. That doesn't mean he needs a new made up label, it just means that looks/biological features aren't all that matters.

A bisexual person can be attracted to both sexes, be it for their personalities or features. There's no need to call it "pansexuality" when it's the former.

Originally Posted by Withano (Post 10001376)

I disagree... if theres anything that umpteen years of Big Brother, and Big Brother forums has taught me, its that plenty of people are sexually attracted to those they despise, pan people won’t relate to that.

Originally Posted by TomC (Post 10001302)

I think the difference between them is that bisexual people are attracted to two genders (hence the 'bi'), whereas pansexual preferences are indiscriminate: they don't see gender.

I don't think there's an implication of bisexual transphobia.

Originally Posted by TomC (Post 10001305)

I also disagree with the four sexualities thing because it contradicts my belief in the scale.

Originally Posted by Withano (Post 10001314)

Your understanding of pan is different to mine.

My understanding of bi, is that gender matters. They are sexually attracted to men because they love cock (etc) and women because they love tits (etc), whereas a pansexual can love both of these genders, but not because of their genitals. Genitals arent a factor that they consider when searching for a companion, which is unlike bi people.

Bi people are sexually aroused by men and women, whereas pansexual people do not care if they are men or women, they are instead aroused by their persona, and gender would therefore not matter.

I dont even know if that makes sense, but I cant make a third paragraph on it, thats so extra.

Bi loves men and women because they are men or women, pan love men and women because they are people that they like.

Originally Posted by Oliver_W (Post 10001377)

They're more likely to be bisexuals who won't fancy someone they don't like. Straight people can be un-attracted to people of their preferred sex if they have crappy personalities - they don't suddenly have a whole new sexuality.

Originally Posted by TomC (Post 10001308)

Because in 2018, the default label is straight. We're still living in a heteronormative society.

Originally Posted by Dezzy (Post 10001382)

But by that definition it does make bisexuals look transphobic or close minded when I think most bisexuals would be DTF with trans as long as there's a sexual attraction there. I just don't think what would be a personal preference should necessitate the need for a sexuality that does have the effect of making bisexual people, regardless of their preferences, seem transphobic and like a lesser form of pansexuality.

I just find it all very pretentious.

Originally Posted by Withano (Post 10001351)

The difference is bi people seeking out both genders because theyre aroused by both genders (may include trans), or pan people seeking out any gender, because they literally can be aroused by any gender depending on their personality (also, may include trans).

Originally Posted by Withano (Post 10001384)

But they’d only be heterosexual if they are sexually attracted to the opposite sex? Not really comparable to somebody who isn’t attracted to a person’s sex.

Originally Posted by Oliver_W (Post 10001391)

What do you mean? I said "straight person" and "preferred sex" - there are two genders, and both terms I used are gender neutral, so could apply to either. I'll rephrase then:
A straight woman can find an otherwise attractive man repulsive if he had a crappy personality. She doesn't suddenly have a whole new sexuality just because persona overrode genitals.

Likewise, a bisexual person who prioritizes personality doesn't have a whole new sexuality. It's just for them looks/genitals aren't the most important thing. There's absolutely no need to invent a new label for that.

Originally Posted by Withano (Post 10001392)

And a pansexual person isn't fundamentally attracted to a persons sex, so these parallels dont really work.

Originally Posted by Withano (Post 10001388)

I agree, bi people, hetero people etc etc, some are very dtf trans. Thats not the key difference between bi and pan imo.

Originally Posted by Dezzy (Post 10001397)

That's even worse, it sounds like you're making bi people out to be shallow sex mad maniacs, another problem with the Pansexuality label as it enforces that bisexual stereotype.

I don't think you can explain your way around it, the pansexual label is inherently condescending and outright derogatory to bisexuals, it demeans us, it reduces us to our base extincts and takes away the luxury of preference that other sexualities are seemingly allowed to have without being demeaned by a pretentious alternative.

Originally Posted by Jessica. (Post 10001398)

Yes, but it's because I call myself Demisexual, so I don't think it would be fair to act like it's nonsense for someone to call themselves Pansexual if that's how they feel. Since I found something I identify so strongly with.

Originally Posted by Withano (Post 10001402)

Yeh, i was about to bring up demisexuals too, they are quite similar in a way. Its more to do with romantic attraction than sexual attraction perhaps?

Originally Posted by Oliver_W (Post 10001408)

I'm a DemiLovatoSexual. If you don't think that's valid, it's literal hatespeech!!11

Originally Posted by Jessica. (Post 10001410)

:pat: