ThisisBigBrother.com - UK TV Forums

ThisisBigBrother.com - UK TV Forums (https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/index.php)
-   Serious Debates & News (https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=61)
-   -   Do you think Pansexuality is a thing? (https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/showthread.php?t=341231)

Tom4784 20-05-2018 03:45 PM

Do you think Pansexuality is a thing?
 
Quote:

Pansexuality, or omnisexuality,[1] is the sexual, romantic or emotional attraction towards people regardless of their sex or gender identity.[2][3] Pansexual people may refer to themselves as gender-blind, asserting that gender and sex are not determining factors in their romantic or sexual attraction to others.[4][5]

Pansexuality may be considered a sexual orientation in its own right or a branch of bisexuality, to indicate an alternative sexual identity.[3][6][7] Because pansexual people are open to relationships with people who do not identify as strictly men or women, and pansexuality therefore rejects the gender binary,[3][7] it is often considered a more inclusive term than bisexual.[8][9] To what extent the term bisexual is inclusive when compared with the term pansexual is debated within the LGBT community, especially the bisexual community
Pansexuality is a bugbear of mine because it's very definition basically makes out that bisexuals are transphobic or lesser in comparison. I don't think there's any differences between bisexuality and pansexuality to warrant two different terms and I generally think that, when it comes to the LGBT, we should be simplifying things and not coming up with new terms that are designed to make every last person feel unique and special.

I think when it comes down to it, there's only four sexual orientations which are straight, gay, bi and Asexual. I think anything else is extraneous tbh and I cringe whenever I see someone say LGBTGSDGARASDASASHRTDFAS because it's just so extra in a bad way since it gives fuel to the fire for the people who want to dismiss the cause as a whole.

RileyH 20-05-2018 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dezzy (Post 10001142)
Pansexuality is a bugbear of mine because it's very definition basically makes out that bisexuals are transphobic or lesser in comparison. I don't think there's any differences between bisexuality and pansexuality to warrant two different terms and I generally think that, when it comes to the LGBT, we should be simplifying things and not coming up with new terms that are designed to make every last person feel unique and special.

:clap1: :clap1:

MB. 20-05-2018 04:01 PM

I don't see why it's any of my business to go around labelling other people's sexual identities as valid or invalid

Tom4784 20-05-2018 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MB. (Post 10001170)
I don't see why it's any of my business to go around labelling other people's sexual identities as valid or invalid

But by definition, pansexuality does just that to bisexuality.

Twosugars 20-05-2018 04:09 PM

Imo it's too early to say. Gender fluidity has become a widely publicised thing only recently. Need to wait and see if it catches on as a popular alternative to binary genders. It may or may not be just a fad.

Denver 20-05-2018 04:12 PM

Well I'm pansexual

MB. 20-05-2018 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adam. (Post 10001181)
Well I'm pansexual

In which case I've changed my mind

Shaun 20-05-2018 04:27 PM

Whilst gender fluidity is entirely valid and 100% something I support, it is still ultimately the fluidity between two set sexes and I would consider anyone who's attracted to someone regardless of their gender as 'bisexual'.

As Dezzy said, its very definition just basically implies that anyone who identifies as a bisexual is inherently transphobic.

I don't really see the need for extra letters to LGBT because the very existence of an "LGBT" community is already fractured and complicated enough within itself - see every single example of gays rubbing trans the wrong way, the past ten years :laugh: Of course if it's just an umbrella term for "let's have a pride event, X Y and Z you're all welcome!" then sure, but I don't see any natural inclination for bisexual people to be associated, by definition, with say, asexuals, or allies. (I personally think including 'allies' at all is a bit laughable but that's neither here nor there).

Asexuality also seems an odd inclusion, since I would have thought having zero sexual interest wouldn't have much of an impact on your day to day life, and see little room for prejudice against you... save for a few awkward "well WHY don't you like sex!!!??" questions.

And once you start attempting to break down the differences between genderfluid, genderqueer, agender, you just generally start losing people and it's a little bit like trying to explain the rules to Quidditch to someone who's never read Harry Potter, nor has to.

montblanc 20-05-2018 04:27 PM

i think it is tbh

but i agree that the extraneous amount of terms is unnecessary

bots 20-05-2018 04:38 PM

I don't know why any labels are needed at all. It's the creation of labels and trying to pigeon hole people that causes the majority of the problems that we have.

Twosugars 20-05-2018 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shaun (Post 10001189)
Whilst gender fluidity is entirely valid and 100% something I support, it is still ultimately the fluidity between two set sexes and I would consider anyone who's attracted to someone regardless of their gender as 'bisexual'.

As Dezzy said, its very definition just basically implies that anyone who identifies as a bisexual is inherently transphobic.

I don't really see the need for extra letters to LGBT because the very existence of an "LGBT" community is already fractured and complicated enough within itself - see every single example of gays rubbing trans the wrong way, the past ten years :laugh: Of course if it's just an umbrella term for "let's have a pride event, X Y and Z you're all welcome!" then sure, but I don't see any natural inclination for bisexual people to be associated, by definition, with say, asexuals, or allies. (I personally think including 'allies' at all is a bit laughable but that's neither here nor there).

Asexuality also seems an odd inclusion, since I would have thought having zero sexual interest wouldn't have much of an impact on your day to day life, and see little room for prejudice against you... save for a few awkward "well WHY don't you like sex!!!??" questions.

And once you start attempting to break down the differences between genderfluid, genderqueer, agender, you just generally start losing people and it's a little bit like trying to explain the rules to Quidditch to someone who's never read Harry Potter, nor has to.

Agree with most.
But would have to ask bisexuals if they go for mixed gendered individuals or not. We should not assume they do. If you like chicks and dicks does it mean you automatically like chicks with dicks?

Shaun 20-05-2018 04:54 PM

Perhaps not, but it would be wrong to assume they don't, too, as the word 'pan' seems to.

montblanc 20-05-2018 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bitontheslide (Post 10001199)
I don't know why any labels are needed at all. It's the creation of labels and trying to pigeon hole people that causes the majority of the problems that we have.

we live in a society where being straight is “normal”

how would people who aren’t straight live in a world without labels?

Twosugars 20-05-2018 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shaun (Post 10001210)
Perhaps not, but it would be wrong to assume they don't, too, as the word 'pan' seems to.

Of course

Amy Jade 20-05-2018 05:43 PM

Honestly I am quite ignorant about sexuality. I am straight and I have a few gay and bi friends so I get that but anything else I am pretty vague on. I don't tend to care what somebodys sexuality is so I don't understand it well at all.

TomC 20-05-2018 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dezzy (Post 10001142)
Pansexuality is a bugbear of mine because it's very definition basically makes out that bisexuals are transphobic or lesser in comparison. I don't think there's any differences between bisexuality and pansexuality to warrant two different terms and I generally think that, when it comes to the LGBT, we should be simplifying things and not coming up with new terms that are designed to make every last person feel unique and special.

I think when it comes down to it, there's only four sexual orientations which are straight, gay, bi and Asexual. I think anything else is extraneous tbh and I cringe whenever I see someone say LGBTGSDGARASDASASHRTDFAS because it's just so extra in a bad way since it gives fuel to the fire for the people who want to dismiss the cause as a whole.

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.

TomC 20-05-2018 05:49 PM

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

TomC 20-05-2018 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bitontheslide (Post 10001199)
I don't know why any labels are needed at all. It's the creation of labels and trying to pigeon hole people that causes the majority of the problems that we have.

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

Withano 20-05-2018 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dezzy (Post 10001142)
Pansexuality is a bugbear of mine because it's very definition basically makes out that bisexuals are transphobic or lesser in comparison. I don't think there's any differences between bisexuality and pansexuality to warrant two different terms and I generally think that, when it comes to the LGBT, we should be simplifying things and not coming up with new terms that are designed to make every last person feel unique and special.

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.

Crimson Dynamo 20-05-2018 06:08 PM

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:

Withano 20-05-2018 06:10 PM

(Yes, I think pansexual is a thing. Some people are sexually attracted to cattle or cars or whatever furries are supposed to be, why cant others be sexually attacted to personality!)

Shaun 20-05-2018 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Withano (Post 10001314)
Bi loves men and women because they are men or women, pan love men and women because they are people that they like.

See I've heard this line of removing the sex from the whole equation before but that still doesn't make much sense to me. Ultimately you are playing with someone's genitals, whatever their gender is, so just resting and saying "I fall in love with a person, not a sex :)" is just incredibly condescending to anyone who identifies as anything other than pansexual. Also implies all homosexual males only like cis men, all heterosexual females only like cis men, etc. etc.

Withano 20-05-2018 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adam. (Post 10001181)
Well I'm pansexual

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shaun (Post 10001339)
See I've heard this line of removing the sex from the whole equation before but that still doesn't make much sense to me. Ultimately you are playing with someone's genitals, whatever their gender is, so just resting and saying "I fall in love with a person, not a sex :)" is just incredibly condescending to anyone who identifies as anything other than pansexual. Also implies all homosexual males only like cis men, all heterosexual females only like cis men, etc. etc.

It doesnt really, unless you presume that hetero males always only like cis women (etc). I’m sure there are far beyond millions of self identifying heterosexual men that like transwomen too. You’re reading into the ‘trans’ thing more than I, thats not the key difference from my perspective.

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).

@Adam contributing more would be helpful if he really is pan? Am i on the right track or no?

Beso 20-05-2018 06:29 PM

Quote:

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.

Can a childs persona attract them?

Withano 20-05-2018 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by parmnion (Post 10001352)
Can a childs persona attract them?

I wouldnt call that pan, I’d call that something else.


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:03 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.