you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]julesburm1891 48 insightful - 2 fun48 insightful - 1 fun49 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 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.

[–]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.