[Withano]

Originally Posted by parmnion

Can a childs persona attract them?

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

[montblanc]

Originally Posted by parmnion

Can a childs persona attract them?

i think you missed the point

[Beso]

Originally Posted by montblanc

i think you missed the point

Thats why i am asking a question thanks.

[montblanc]

Originally Posted by parmnion

Thats why i am asking a question thanks.

oh sorry i thought you were being sarcastic

[Oliver_W]

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.

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.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

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.

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.

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by Withano

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.

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.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

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.

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.

[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.

[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

[Crimson Dynamo]

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

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

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

I have often seen pansexual ghosts.

[Withano]

(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!)

[Oliver_W]

Nah, pansexuality is not a thing.

It doesn't matter if someone thinks they're "nonbinary", they still either look male or female, and people will be attracted to them accordingly. Same with transpeople - some transwomen will unfortunately just look like dudes with long hair, so someone who likes long haired guys might fancy them as that.

[Redway]

Nope.

[Jessica.]

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.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Jessica.

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.

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?

[Jessica.]

Originally Posted by Withano

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?

No, it means you don't find anyone attractive at all, until you build a very strong friendship and emotional connection. You are basically asexual outside of that. So it counts as a branch of asexuality.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Jessica.

No, it means you don't find anyone attractive at all, until you build a very strong friendship and emotional connection. You are basically asexual outside of that. So it counts as a branch of asexuality.

I thought the label for that was 'aromantic'

Seems some labels just mean the same thing? Like pan and bi I guess.