BisexualBi-furious rant

submitted by [deleted] from (self.LGBDropTheT)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

They really do keep changing the definition, it's so stupid. And I'd agree with you if it didn't directly contradict TRA logic. If trans men are men and trans women are women, then bisexual should include them, right? Liking trans people would then be a preference within bisexuality right? Like being into tattoos or redheads. But no, they can't decide on what the fuck they're advocating. Until they either admit trans men and women are not real men and women, or they stop inventing new sexuality and gender labels just to make themselves feel special, I don't agree with the existence of pansexual the way it's currently defined.

[–]PeakingPeachEaterfemale♀ | detrans🦎 | eater of peaches 🍑 17 insightful - 1 fun17 insightful - 0 fun18 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Yeah, I see what you mean. It basically became "We like trans people"(as tho it's a "third" sex??? Male, female, "trans"??) to "We don't SEE genitals, we see pErSoNaLiTiEs"...okay? So...are they saying that they're "not-like-all-bisexuals" because of the "promiscuous" stereotype? Lol

I just "like" pansexuality so it's a TRA radar lol. Bisexuality isn't trendy enough for the qUeEr people anymore so they opt for demisexual, pansexual "bi lesbians" lol.

One of my friends says she's bisexual BUT "technically" pansexual because she likes non-binaries AND trans. I think that makes her slightly self aware that regular bi people from LGB are NOT attracted to trans lol.

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

I def agree that when someone distinguishes bi from pan they at least acknowledge the "old school" bi's from the woke ones. I guess I'm being stubborn about not accepting pan as a label because it's not something we apply to other preferences. If a guy likes both blonde women and red headed women we don't have a name for that, he's just a straight guy with a preference. Likewise if a guy likes women and trans men he's still straight, but suddenly he needs to label his sexuality differently? Why? I'm tired of giving these uwu assholes more reasons to circlejerk to how special they think they are. "Oh I'm so special the other sexualities aren't good enough. You have to say you're pan to accommodate my specialness." I'm tired of accommodating these people. I feel the same way about the term demisexual. You aren't special or better just bc you never get the hots for a stranger. You have a preference within being either gay, straight, or bi.

[–]PeakingPeachEaterfemale♀ | detrans🦎 | eater of peaches 🍑 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Ah, that analogy makes sense. Yeah, I honestly think the term pansexuality sound ridiculous, and only liked it as more of a indicator to see if someone is in "qUeEr" culture or not.

But now you are making me think we should do completely away with term "pansexuality".

I also wish we could just have homosexual, heterosexual, and bisexual for terms or use the terms coloquial "gay/lesbian", "straight", and "bi" and that there were no "trans" people to worry about making inclusive term.

By that, I mean I wish people(especially young) would NOT transition...this is coming from someone who detransitioned. I am glad I did not go to gender (? trans?) therapy, then they would have tell me to go through with surgery which does no help with the issues I had.

I had body dysforia very bad. I wanted to be a boy, I did not like my body(like any teenager really, now Im an old fart lol). I grew up in a conservative, religious household where "male chauvism" is very prominent. I was locked in house while brothers can go do what they wanted...Or i have to take them with me if i go out. The town i grew up was very small so no immediate danger or anything...

Anyways I think surgery is rather life changing and people should think it over before going with it. I was trans but did not EVER want to do surgery(for multitude reason, for one, it would not BE the same as being born boy, I used to wish I could die and be reborn as one---of course I knew that would never happen), so that made me peak more.

My bad, I went on a ramble. Lol

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

Are you me?? Minus the growing up in a conservative household your story sounds like mine. Identified as a trans guy/nonbinary for a few years. Binding, packing, new wardrobe, pronoun fuckery, etc. I did go to a gender therapist, who was unhelpful as hell and told me my internalized homophobia/misogyny was actually proof I wasn't a girl. I can't say I had the intense hatred of my female body (although I despised my period and still do), but I definitely wanted a male body much more than the one I had when the dysphoria got really bad.

"I was trans but did not EVER want to do surgery(for multitude reason, for one, it would not BE the same as being born boy, I used to wish I could die and be reborn as one---of course I knew that would never happen), so that made me peak more."

This. Exactly this. I used to be obsessed with being male to the point where I'd have dreams about it frequently. But I knew no amount of hormones or surgery would give me that. It also breaks my heart to see young people on puberty blockers and cross sex hormones they don't need. It upsets me to see that gender nonconformity has basically been erased because the second TRAs see a GNC person or even just GNC behavior (a female writer using a male pen name to get her books published for instance) they try to trans them.

And it's funny because I can see how the pan label can be useful for identifying the woke crusaders, so I guess we both kind of brought each other over to our respective sides lol. I guess I wouldn't have a problem with it if people who used it recognized that by definition, pan implies trans people are seen as a third sex. Obviously they aren't, but it would at least be consistent with the TRA's demands that you can't be run of the mill straight, lesbian, gay, or bi and also like trans people. Again, obviously you can, but if the claim is made that you need to relabel your sexuality for a trans person then TRA's also can't assert that trans men and women are the same as natal men and women. I just want consistency. Something has to give in either direction.

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

Yeah I never know what pansexual means.

Surely pansexual was created purely for people that are attracted to everyone but I've read this is wrong also😑

[–]haveanicedaytoo💗💜💙 10 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

It would make sense to eliminate pansexual altogether, but use the 2012 partial definition of pansexual (attracted to men, women, and trans people) and call those people transphiles. Of course it will never catch on, but if you really need to virtue signal how attracted you are to this small subgroup of people, that's reallty the most correct word I can think of. Anyone can be a transphile, LGB or Straight. It isn't something only bi people have to be saddled with.

EDIT - actually, from now on, if anyone calls me twansphobic uwu, I'm going to say "I'm not a transphile, that doesn't make me transphobic."