BisexualWhat are your opinions on pansexuality? Imo it's just bisexual except trying to be more "inclusive" and special

submitted by [deleted] from i.imgur.com

all 29 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]julesburm1891 48 insightful - 2 fun48 insightful - 1 fun49 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

Tbh, I’m here for the pansexuality of 2010. How it was framed then was “bisexual, but cool with dating trans people.” I think acknowledging that not all bisexuals want to date someone with mixed-sex characteristics is actually kind of useful.

The pansexuality of 2020 is a condescending, biphobic side show though.

[–][deleted] 26 insightful - 2 fun26 insightful - 1 fun27 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

I have anecdotally found that almost NO bi people want to date trans people, and ESPECIALLY trans people with opposite sex genitals. My pool of bisexual pals are mostly female (because men are not allowed to really be bisexual, and I for real think there are LOTS of them that exist despite studies saying it’s not a thing), and the female bisexuals I know who have voiced their opinion on this shit seem to really not be into trans women. I’ve seen bisexuals and lesbians with trans men, and even some bi men with trans men rarely, but I think it’s incorrect that people think bi women are into trans women. I think pan was sort of made to cope with transmen’s gender feels wails. Lol. Trans men in particular

Bi or lesbians who had women they loved or wanted who started to trans id used “pan” as a way to try and save their spot as female-leaning or straight up gay women in a community of women who couldn’t handle being female and demanded their partners sort of renounce their place in the community to be with them. It was horrible.

Edit: so what I mean is pan was sort of MADE by bisexual and lesbians who knew dating trans men was still dating women, and the bi women were trying to resist trashing their own label that everyone was starting to call “transphobic” and lesbians could not square being bi because they knew it was not true. So pan. Essential “pan” is a lesbian and bisexual COPE. Wlw trying to cope as things began to get worse for them. It started that way in my groups anyway.

[–]reluctant_commenter 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

That is really interesting, I did not know much about pansexual as a term but that makes sense.

(because men are not allowed to really be bisexual, and I for real think there are LOTS of them that exist despite studies saying it’s not a thing),

I think a lot of the support for this idea comes from a researcher named Michael Bailey, who actually walked back his conclusion saying "bisexual men don't really exist" after a bi organization pointed out some of his study's flaws.

This is an updated article on his research.. "research". The fact that it took outside people and organization calling out the issues with his work for him to get it right, makes me really angry. https://www.inverse.com/mind-body/study-on-bisexual-orientation-is-changing-outdated-attitudes/amp

2014 NYT article about how he started to change his tune: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/23/magazine/the-scientific-quest-to-prove-bisexuality-exists.html

I might actually make a post about this, I didn't realize there was a 2020 study that came out so recently.

[–]wafflegaffWoman. SuperBi. 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

(because men are not allowed to really be bisexual, and I for real think there are LOTS of them that exist despite studies saying it’s not a thing)

Oh, they exist all right. Most of the men I've been close to whether sexually or otherwise have been bisexual. Also, I prefer them to straight men. They're more open-minded, more emotionally available, more adventuresome, and way less stuck in gender stereotypes in my (not-statistically-significant) experience. I've heard that from others as well.

[–]yousaythosethingsFind and Replace "gatekeeping" with "having boundaries" 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I heard that Bailey's study was blown out of proportion or taken out of context because the point was that often people are inaccurate about the self-identification of their sexual orientation, and that that was especially the case with people claiming to be bisexuals. I don't think it's controversial that people are often wrong when claiming to be bisexual. A lot of us hold onto the belief that we're bisexual before we realize we're gay. A lot of straight people claim to be bisexual to appear interesting and open-minded. The point is that in the field of sexuality you often can't rely on a person's self-label to be accurate. He re-did the study and instead formed the bisexual pool out of those who have had at least at least one relationship of three months or more with with both men and women. And once sourced that way, the individuals' bisexuality was affirmed.

The parallel is with transgender people as he has observed that a lot of their narrative is fictional and misappropriated, particularly by AGPs fabricating cover stories to appear HSTS.

[–]VioletRemiCat, homosexual one 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I have anecdotally found that almost NO bi people want to date trans people, and ESPECIALLY trans people with opposite sex genitals

It is more like almost no people in general want to date trans people, as it brings a lot of troubles and their looks are often on an "uncanny valley" territory. Nowadays especially, with all those mispronounses and other annoying stuff no one will want to deal with. Relationships are for comfort and love, not for fights and annoyance.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Most trans people have a lot of baggage, and are so focused on themselves and their feelings they don’t have much to offer a partner until they can stop being so self-revolved. Even if transgenderism did not produce odd looking people, being with someone so self-absorbed and with such a fraught relationship to their own body is exhausting for their partner, and not exciting for anyone looking for a partner. Most people don’t want to sign up for a partner who hates their own body, especially when they are guaranteed future health risks because of transition. It’s just really not appealing to a healthy adult to envision being with someone like this.

[–]8bitgay 16 insightful - 1 fun16 insightful - 0 fun17 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I never understand their reaction to 2010 pan. It's always like "No, you're not pan just because you like trans!". They complain so much about people who don't date them, but they also complain about people who would date them. Why don't you go for this definition of pan instead of trying to go for LGB people who aren't attracted to you?

I've even seen a couple comments in gay subs of FtM guys saying they want to date gay guys, not bi, because they're afraid a bi guy might be attracted just because he views the FtM as a woman. Again, they complain about us because we don't feel attraction, but they also seem to sabotage any chance of being with people that could be attracted to them.

Not to mention that the community is now saying that lesbians and gays should also date non-binary, genderqueer, etc. If LGB has to feel attracted to trans, if LGB has to feel attracted to non-binary genders, then what's the point of the pan label even existing?

[–]MarkJeffersonTight defenses and we draw the line 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Pans are not remotely validating enough for them. And their transgender identity being valid means more to themselves then finding a compatible mate. Their priorities are all flipped. No wonder so many are never happy when Love is only of secondary importance. This is why they don't fit with the LGB.

[–]midgetmetalhead19 22 insightful - 3 fun22 insightful - 2 fun23 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

I’ts a way of sorting the TERF bisexuals from the woke bisexuals. Us lot in the first group can go f-k ourselves with a rusty nail.

[–]yousaythosethingsFind and Replace "gatekeeping" with "having boundaries" 9 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

Well then in online dating we terfy lesbians and bi women will at least reap the benefits of the label "bisexual" not being misappropriated anymore and it will now be synonymous with sanity. The word "lesbian" though could mean anything since it's now a non-man who is attracted to at least one non-man.

[–]midgetmetalhead19 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Good for us bisexuals but the lesbians lose out. Every which way, women lose. Whether it’s bi being misappropriated as ‘pan’ (tbf both sexes lose out here but we all know who’s gonna take more flak) or transbians insisting lesbians have sex with them

[–]haveanicedaytoo💗💜💙 16 insightful - 7 fun16 insightful - 6 fun17 insightful - 7 fun -  (0 children)

I really love that schadenfraude feeling of witnessing the internet (especially trans) turning against the pans for being twansphobic uwu attentionwhores.

[–]LiterallyawomanTERF IRL 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I dOnt SeE gEnDeR is a conversation for you and people you are attracted to, not everyone under the sun we do NOT gaf.

The first time someone told me they were pan, it was to “one-up” me as I had just shared I was bi, and they were a morbidly obese, chain smoking man I met in college who also lectured me on how his grandpa smoked til age 90 so he could too without health risks, and also lectured me on how as a woman I am automatically a feminist. Shitty guy.

Needy, unhealthy, insecure...that’s what I read when someone tells me they’re one of the many wonderkin gender identities. You aren’t more enlightened because you think you are attracted to people before knowing or seeing their genitalia-that’s fucking everyone. I cannot stress enough how dumb it is when people think they're in a tiny minority of humans who are attracted to intellect and personality before sexual characteristics.

People are, and sexuality is complex ; that doesn't mean your sexuality is a personality trait. You are 99.9% like every other meatbag on this planet.

when they think their gender identity defines them it shows to me they don't know their true selves, or have any essence outside their physical presentation. Like teenagers trying to look cool and discover who they really are (which is a trial because it's all ego and your true self is NOT your ego)

-but its a bunch of failed-to-launch millennials along with the zoomers now

[–]MezozoicGayoldschool gay 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

as a woman I am automatically a feminist

If that was true, that would be actually great.

[–]LiterallyawomanTERF IRL 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Maybe having a man tell me I didn’t know myself and was a feminist made me a feminist a few years later

[–]JulienMayfair 8 insightful - 10 fun8 insightful - 9 fun9 insightful - 10 fun -  (1 child)

I love my cast iron skillet, but I'm not sexually attracted to it.

[–]wafflegaffWoman. SuperBi. 7 insightful - 7 fun7 insightful - 6 fun8 insightful - 7 fun -  (0 children)

Then let me introduce you to some foodie friends of mine.

[–]AnokiFrench 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They can be pansexual if they want I don’t care , as long as I’m not bothered and as long as they don’t drag bisexuals like myself and others in their problems

[–]Canardyyy 11 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I hate it more now than ever. Pansexuality is very homophobic, biphopic and misleading to those who aren’t aware of all the fancy terms of the alphabet soup, especially when the unaware are being fed crap. And convinced that everyone is pan or should be.

Hate it.

[–]CJLez 7 insightful - 6 fun7 insightful - 5 fun8 insightful - 6 fun -  (2 children)

The only true pansexual is Belinda Blumenthal.

Actual answer - they are technically bisexual and I hate their condescending 'hearts not parts' phrase (if a magical disembodied vagina floated past me I wouldn't be interested in it) but... fine, whatever. There's bigger fish to fry.

[–]turtleduck23 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Not only that but "hearts not parts" is homophobic and sounds like something a southern preacher would say during a gay conversion meeting. You could have a funny, beautiful intelligent woman and a gay guy is still not gonna want to sleep with her, same with an amazing guy and a lesbian. It seems that once the "hearts not parts" phrase took off it opened up the gates for "genital fetish" slogan. "Why are gays and lesbians sooo obsessed with genitals? do you have a vagina fetish? why does it matter what's between their legs if you connect? a lady dick is just a large clit"

[–]VioletRemiCat, homosexual one 5 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

I was married for 3 years on an amazing man, handsome, kind and smart. Yet it not fixed my homosexuality, and we ended up thinking with him that I am frigid, because regardless of how we both tried to make "feeling" or sex happen, nothing was really working. So this is just bullsh*t and victimising lesbians.

[–]MezozoicGayoldschool gay 6 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

It does not exist, because there only two sexes, so they are just bisexual people who want to be special. Transgenders and transsexuals are still of one of two sexes. Non-binary and genderfluid are still of one of two sexes. So it is impossible to love more than two sexes, so it is impossible to be pansexual.

The other pansexual definition was "I do not care who I date" instead of "I like two or more sexes". However, "I do not care about sex of my date partner" is just bisexual with such tastes, and that is it. Gay men who will say "I don't care who I date if they have a dick", is still gay men and not new sexuality, he just not picky or very horny, that is it.

[–][deleted] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It’s dumb.

[–]wafflegaffWoman. SuperBi. 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think that word should be reserved for people who are attracted to men, women and trans (etc.?) people. For that usage it actually serves a purpose.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Another of their sexuality creations.

[–]LasagnaRossa 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

To me, it makes sense with the traditional meaning: people attracted to all genders. Afterall bisexuality is there to mean "attracted to both ".

But since the current erasure, pansexuality hasn't reason to exist as a label anymore.

[–]luckystar 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

More of a woksexual myself