Yes, just click on any of the numbers.

If you're gonna criticise Caitlin's attitude (which is fine), you may as well address the person who actually made that 'hipster' comment. I agree that it was uncalled for and insensitive, but you shouldn't take things so seriously.

How so... the only people I could see it mattering to is the one's that could take offense.

59 so far.

ahh, muchos gracias.

Sorry that I take my sexuality so seriously, to some it may be a bit of a laugh or a joke but it's a really serious matter to me. Shouldn't of even bothered posting here.

First of all I've never actually claimed to be pansexual at present, I did in the past but as I outlined earlier in the thread, I find my situation complex and prefer not to label myself except as bisexual if needs be to make things easier.

Yeah, I'm not at all tolerant of ignorance and insensitivity when it comes to an issue like sexuality that requires so much respect and understanding. Again, there is nothing wrong with people taking an interest and wanting to understand more, that's a good thing - but passing other people's feelings off with derogatory comments is out of order. Forgive me for not respecting such ignorance.

is being called hipster really derogatory? Now you are offending all the hipsters. It's like a never ending cycle of offense.

I'm actually quite appalled this is even being debated.

If someone called a bisexual member of this forum a closeted gay, greedy and the like, I'm pretty sure they'd be infracted. Just because another sexual orientation isn't as well known, that doesn't give people the right to lambast users who may possess that identity. Is it one rule for some and another rule for others or are we allowed to be prejudiced towards other members now?

I think it's fine not labelling yourself, but you seem to be speaking out in defence of pansexuality, and it was never under attack by the way.

Caitlin different see a difference between pansexuality and bisexuality. It almost seems that in order to be pansexual, you'd have to think that bisexuals aren't attracted to transgendered people.

And what derogatory comments were made?

I'm speaking out in defence of pansexuality because that's the issue that has been raised in the last few pages, and I do believe a few comments were attacking it. Actually no, not believe, they were attacking it. I'd speak out in defence of homosexuality if that was criticised (I have done many times before both on here, elsewhere online and in real life) and other sexual orientations because again, sexuality is an issue I feel passionate about and I think people should be open minded, accepting, respectful and non-judgemental about it no matter what a person's preference or identity is. This is not an isolated defence from me, I cannot abide ignorance and disrespect for this issue.

Well I've certainly never thought that, but how I'd explain pansexuality is another separate issue.

And referring to someone's sexual orientation and as such their personal feelings as a way of being 'different' and 'hipster' devalues and demonises it. It is belittling and disrespectful to those who may be struggling with it themselves. That is derogatory. People can try and spin it any way they want, but it is.

Choosing to get upset over words like "hipster" and "different" seems like a waste of energy to me. As lostalex mentioned, are they really such bad labels.

And I am sorry that you felt belittled and disrespected by Caitlin, Nate & me chatting about sexuality, but I guarantee you, that was not our intent.

To me you're a bit of an expect on pansexuality, you're the first person I ever encountered who called themselves it. And I would really like to hear you define it, but maybe another time as this debate is in danger of going around in circles.

Anyway I'll just finish by saying once again that no offence was meant, and I apologise.

*looks into thread*

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m44br8FkT11qcr9e3.gif

In the context they were used they were quite insulting. It was the way in which they were said. 'Meh, it just seems a way of being 'different'' is to forget that actually the people who have identified themselves as that have real feelings and it's not just some silly little choice to draw attention to themselves or to look cool or unique, as was also implied by the 'hipster' remark. This is how people actually feel, it's not a fashionable surface lifestyle choice, this is deep-rooted within a person.

I didn't feel insulted by you but I do much appreciate your apology, thank you :)

And that's quite kind of you to put it like that, and I would be more than happy to explain how I see it at some other point as well. I enjoy discussing things like this, you learn a lot, all people have to do is remain respectful and sensitive to people's feelings and experiences, an issue like this really requires it.

Apology accepted and appreciated :hug:

..I don’t see anything insulting or discriminating in this thread though...I think there are a lot of people who don’t understand about every type of sexuality and that’s the good thing about having these sort of discussions etc..to learn things that you probably really should know, but don’t always...but I also think that you can lighten a thread or whatever by making a throwaway comment that means nothing at all and doesn’t reflect any views or discriminations, without being accused of such...I understand exactly what Ninastar said, whether it was the right understanding of pan sexuality or not, it was her understanding and also said with respect and not discrimination..I also feel that Nathan’s comment didn’t in anyway discriminate but just reaffirmed etc what other ‘personal views/understandings’ on the internet were..which really I suppose just confirms that we should talk about these things more so we actually understand properly...I actually thought pan sexuality was more about an ‘emotional romantic’ love for either sex, rather than a physical thing..but that isn’t accurate, so it’s good for me and others to learn but I don’t think that telling people that their comments are derogatory, ignorant or that they’re not showing empathy etc , when they haven’t said anything to merit those sort of offensive remarks is a very good way of explaining differences etc in sexualities...


..and sexuality is such a personal thing and should never be disrespected and in an ideal world, always be accepted as well..but from reading this thread, Ninastar didn’t disrespect anything, neither did Nathan..but your posts are quite disrespectful and derogatory to them..and if their understanding or anyone else’s is incorrect, then for everyone who is interested in knowing more about different sexualities, then attacking them for their misunderstanding isn’t ever going to keep these discussions open...if it’s felt that people are ‘ignorant’..then educate them..with civility and respectfully...don’t accuse them of something which none of their posts indicate that they are...


...the 'hipster' remark in my opinion was nothing..a throwaway comment..maybe a 'lightener' to the thread/topic..not offensive/derogatory/dierespectful etc in any way..unless chosen to take it that way..but as has been debated on this forum several times before, when it comes to humour and 'controversial' or sensitive topics and specific comedians etc...humour is kind of needed as well..and doesn't reflect discriminations at all..people will always be passionate and sensitive in certain areas of their lives, we can't not be really....but let's say for instance.. if 'lighteners' or even jokes in the case of say Frankie Boyle/Ricky Gervais etc are taken too seriously to reflect their actual views and they're attacked for them then understanding and points are completely often lost..... of course, these are just my opinions....I hope this makes sense, I'm rushing for work....


EDIT:..with an opportunity to educate..you don't need to insult..in fact, it's probably a reasonably sure way for that persons understanding never to change...and humour is needed for balance as well..no matter how personal a subject or how passionate you are..that's the very time you may need it most.....

..oh, I should have said that the reason I quoted GGs post as well was because in my opinion no apologies were needed from her or anyone else as nothing disrespectful was said..except (and also my opinion) things that were said to them and not by them...as you yourself have said Jack on several occasions and you know I respect you for it as well..humour, lightheartedness etc is needed as well..balance...people have 'their way' of saying things and I guess that is also an individual thing like sexuality, you could say..but it's about realising when something is said in a derogatory way and when it's not at all...and no discrimination is there...Ninastar, Nathan, GG have never in my opinion showed any indication of being discriminating on sexuality...I would say that the reason why they're very well liked and popular on this forum as well is because they're not discriminating/judgemental of anything or anyone and are very open to individuality in every area, including sexuality...the posts that they make indicate that to me anyway...it's like the 'who quoted what' thread and learning the ways people say things etc....

...oh and also lol..the reason I mentioned Frankie Boyle etc is because whenever a topic is sensitive then offence will be taken, that's inevitable..if you have a disabled child etc for example or feel passionately about that subject only being spoken of in the most serious of ways..then you will take offence and be sensitive..that's only natural..it doesn't mean that those comments were meant how you yourself percieved them though or that person shows any 'ignorance'...it just means it's your own 'personal area' of a boundary you have about that topic....what you personally feel is offensive and what isn't...


..(and I really have to go to work now..will get sacked..can you start a collection for me please Jack...as always, your posts distract me from doing what I should be doing)....

I don't think that's necessarily true. It's my understanding that pansexuals are more about the emotional connection to the over person over the physical connection, so maybe that's the differing aspect it has with bisexuality.

I still don't see how that's different. That's implying that other sexualities are not also attracted to people emotionally. Obviously gays and str8s and bisexuals also have an emotional connection, so it's kind of offensive for pansexuals to say that they are more connected emotionally than other sexualities.

I'm gay, but that doesn't mean im just attracted to dicks, or my attractions are just based on the physical body. Having an emotional connection is just as (if not more) important than immediate sexual attraction. I've definitely been attracted to some men emotionally that i wouldn't be attracted to just based on their physical body. And i've also been very attracted to some physical bodies, that because of their personality or lack of emotional connection makes them ugly to me. That's true for all gay and str8 people. That doesn't make me "pansexual" though.

I'm still not understanding the definition of pansexual.

It might sound like that but I think the difference with pansexuals is that it's more purely about the notional connection for them, whereas with other sexualities its more reliant on both emotional and physical attraction to the other person? That's how I understand it anyway.

What so Homosexual, Bi sexual and Hetro sexual people don't have emotional connections with people, only physical???? wut?

So do they have a physical relationship with these people they are emotionally attracted to?

Bisexuals are attracted to male or females. Hence the 'bi' part meaning two

Pansexuals are attracted to male, female, transgender.

Are sexualities fashionable? my daughter says that she feels some suggest they are bisexual to be cool... Is pan the new bi?

Then you're suggesting that Transgenders are a different sexuality to male or female, isn't that discriminatory in itself?

a good point, I don't know, it's the definition that I've always heard.