I think their problem with the real definition of bisexual that made them redefine it, is that beyond saying that one can be attracted to both sexes, it doesn't say anything about who within the sexes can be included/excluded by one's own preferences.

Firstly, right out of the gate, it categorically eliminates anyone who doesn't identify as male or female(in denial of their sex). So, many transgenders, enbies, etc. Secondly, since sex, unlike gender, is intrinsically harder to simply identify out of, anyone who doesn't identify as their actual sex still can be excluded too. And lastly, with that in mind, one can just opt out of even considering an entire sex, with no recourse for those of that sex other than actions that would make them (rightly) be seen as quite terrible.

Also since genders are basically just personality types nowadays(trans) or things even more transitory(also trans), they are included in the definition so opportunists can simply identify into a gender and claim someone is rejecting them based on an intrinsic aspect more fundamental than simply liking dubstep or something, and so then accuse someone of bigotry for said rejection.

Thanks for this post. This is a complete garbage definition. "regardless of sex or gender"-oh, there's Regard alright. It makes it sound like the sexes are completely interchangeable and substitutable. Is that were the case, then why bother distinguishing between them at all through the label itself? There's already pan, which does exactly that. This revision is just another way to dismiss the right of individual choice.