[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by TomC

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.

It's a pointless and pretentious difference, I'm bisexual and as long as I'm attracted to someone, I don't care what gender they consider themselves.

Originally Posted by TomC

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

If you aren't exclusively attracted to one gender then you're bisexual in my eyes (or asexual if you have no sexual impulses at all obvi).

Originally Posted by Withano

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.

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.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

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.

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 Withano

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).

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Withano

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

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.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

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.

Well, I think that what it means? Dont shoot the messenger lol.

Some people are sexually attracted to men because they are men, some people are sexually attracted to women because they are women, bi people are sexually attracted to both, asexual people are sexually attracted to neither, pansexual people are sexually attracted to personality.

I guess people can be sexually attracted to literally anything... even objects or animals... if some people say they are sexually attracted to personalities, instead of persons, then theres a label for that.

Thats my understanding of it anyway. Pans would still want to **** them silly once they find the sexiest persona. They’re no less of a sex-mad-maniac than the average bi, I’d imagine.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Withano

Well, I think that what it means? Dont shoot the messenger lol.

Some people are sexually attracted to men because they are men, some people are sexually attracted to women because they are women, bi people are sexually attracted to both, asexual people are sexually attracted to neither, pansexual people are sexually attracted to personality.

I guess people can be sexually attracted to literally anything... even objects or animals... if some people say they are sexually attracted to personalities, instead of persons, then theres a label for that.

Thats my understanding of it anyway. Pans would still want to **** them silly once they find the sexiest persona. They’re no less of a sex-mad-maniac than the average bi, I’d imagine.

I'm not having a go, I'm just responding.

Are there pansexual equivalents to straight or gay people who don'tare attracted to personalities? If not, why? Why are bisexuals the only orientation that's demeaned in such a way?

No matter how you cut it, there's really no meaningful differences between bisexuality or pansexuality aside from the latter's existence makes the former seem less valid or hateful.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

I'm not having a go, I'm just responding.

Are there pansexual equivalents to straight or gay people who don'tare attracted to personalities? If not, why? Why are bisexuals the only orientation that's demeaned in such a way?

No matter how you cut it, there's really no meaningful differences between bisexuality or pansexuality aside from the latter's existence makes the former seem less valid or hateful.

Well no to your second paragraph, because pansexuals do not care about the sex or gender of their partner... so, that on its own makes it very different than gay or straight people... or bi people.. who all do care about sex or gender of their partner...

I think you’re focussing on the similarities instead of the differences... the similarities being that yes, both bisexuals and pansexuals historically date both sexes... that doesnt make them the same though.

I guess it just comes down to whether you believe a person can be sexually attracted to a personality. Everything else is irrelevant, their only turn on is a personality. And I would say yes, that is possible. I don’t see that at all similar to a bisexual person. Bisexual (and heterosexual and homosexual) people are attracted to people for their genders, pansexual people are not, there are differences as well as similarities.

Jessica, for instance said she was demisexual, and that she was sexually attracted to a man once, that doesnt detract from a womans heterosexuality. They’re two separate things, with both similarities and differences.

[MTVN]

It is a thing because some people consider it to be the most appropriate way to categorise their sexuality. I don't see how anyone else can deny them the ability to make that decision

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by Withano

Well no to your second paragraph, because pansexuals do not care about the sex or gender of their partner...

there's still no meaningful distinction to warrant giving it a whole new label. Bisexuals are attracted to both genders, therefore are happy to date someone with either gender/set of genitals. And maybe some of these bisexuals put personality first. Good for them! Doesn't give them a new sexuality, though.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Withano

Well no to your second paragraph, because pansexuals do not care about the sex or gender of their partner... so, that on its own makes it very different than gay or straight people... or bi people.. who all do care about sex or gender of their partner...

I think you’re focussing on the similarities instead of the differences... the similarities being that yes, both bisexuals and pansexuals historically date both sexes... that doesnt make them the same though.

I guess it just comes down to whether you believe a person can be sexually attracted to a personality. Everything else is irrelevant, their only turn on is a personality. And I would say yes, that is possible. I don’t see that at all similar to a bisexual person. Bisexual (and heterosexual and homosexual) people are attracted to people for their genders, pansexual people are not, there are differences as well as similarities.

Jessica, for instance said she was demisexual, and that she was sexually attracted to a man once, that doesnt detract from a womans heterosexuality. They’re two separate things, with both similarities and differences.

Everyone can be attracted to a personality, it's not something that's exclusive to pansexuals. There are plenty of straight, gay and bi people out there that have had relationships with people, not because they are the best looking people around but because they've had winning personalities. Some people are attracted to people who are funny, for example. That's just a type and any person of any sexuality can have a type when it comes to attraction.

That alone is not worth it's own sexuality, especially if the definition will always be condescending and demeaning to bisexuals.

[TomC]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

If you aren't exclusively attracted to one gender then you're bisexual in my eyes (or asexual if you have no sexual impulses at all obvi).

I am only attracted to men I see in the street and could only see myself in a relationship with men. But I'd love to have sex with a girl before I die.

Does that make me bisexual?

I think saying one smidgen of attraction to the same sex, or even curiousity, constitutes a bisexual is a bit crude, no?

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by TomC

I am only attracted to men I see in the street and could only see myself in a relationship with men. But I'd love to have sex with a girl before I die.

Does that make me bisexual?

I think saying one smidgen of attraction to the same sex, or even curiousity, constitutes a bisexual is a bit crude, no?

I agree with you on that - it just makes you a gay who wants to experiment. Wanting to experiment outside of your sexuality doesn't really make someone bi, imo.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by TomC

I am only attracted to men I see in the street and could only see myself in a relationship with men. But I'd love to have sex with a girl before I die.

Does that make me bisexual?

I think saying one smidgen of attraction to the same sex, or even curiousity, constitutes a bisexual is a bit crude, no?

But are you attracted to girls in any shape or form or are just intrigued about what hetero sex would be like?

Sexual orientation is decided by attraction, a person could **** both genders but could still be considered straight or gay if they are only attracted to one gender.

[TomC]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

But are you attracted to girls in any shape or form or are just intrigued about what hetero sex would be like?

Sexual orientation is decided by attraction, a person could **** both genders but could still be considered straight or gay if they are only attracted to one gender.

The idea of having sex with a girl turns me on (believe it or not). But I'd never look at a girl that way normally