I don't understand pansexuality?

I identified as pan for a while when I felt like that:
My definition would be that gender is not a factor in determining attraction.

As a lesbian, gender IS a factor. I would only date girls.

Pan seems to be a sub-group of bi-sexual, because technically bi-sexual doesn't include all genders (non-binary, gender fluid)

 

Glad I'm not the only one. :icon_bigg

 

Bisexual means someone who is attracted to people of 2 or more genders, and pansexual means someone who can be attracted to people of any gender. They can both mean the same thing, but there are some bisexuals who would not want to date a genderfluid individual or an agender individual, whereas for pans, we might have preferences, but gender is not a dealbreaker ^.^ Many people use bisexual when they can also mean pansexual, and many do not~ but the people who do identify as pansexual are making a specific statement that any gender or gender expression is sexy~ ^.^

I usually refer people to this, because I think it makes things a bit easier~ pans are still part of the bisexual umbrella, and neither is better or worse than the other~ they are just polysexual identities ^.^

 

I've ID'd as both pan and bi, and I guess still ID as both in a way. I just don't give a toss about labels anymore.

There is a lot of ambiguity between the two terms. People define them differently.

Bisexual doesn't by definition include non-binary genders, nor, one can argue, binary trans people, in its attraction pool. Pansexual does, by definition, do that. So while bisexual isn't explicitly exclusive of trans people, it isn't explictly inclusive, either, while pan is. That's the difference, I would say.

 

I've always considered them essentially the same thing, pansexuality just being more clear about its openness non-binary genders.

 

I think of it as "gender blind" like when they are dating they don't see the person for what gender they are but for WHO they are.

 

bidyke, byke, bisexual-lesbian........................ wtf

this is how i'd describe it as well

 

I don't see someone's gender as an issue when dating. I am usually MORE attraction to feminine qualities, be them on a man, woman, or somewhere else in between.......and anyone who knows me knows I love in between. lol

 

This sums it up quickest.

The whole bisexual vs pansexual thing may not mean much to a cisgender individual, but for us trans-folk it does. Pansexual is pretty much the green light to mingle with somebody, but bisexual can go either way, as I have observed bisexuals who adhere to gender roles and whatnot. But then again, I have also seen homosexuals adhere to them as well, which is... actually, I'll leave it at that for the moment.

It boils down to this:

For some people, the sex is important. They don't find particular parts of the body appealing. Some, though, are only inflexible when it comes to gender, but can negotiate with body parts. Bisexual and pansexual just kind of let you know where somebody is, because not all of us are capable of prying that information out. It isn't casual conversation, you know?

 

Yup. That's why I started identifying as Pansexual. Once I read the definition of it I realized that the Bi label worked, but Pan just fit a lot better.

 

Pansexuals can do it with every one and anyone
What makes it different from bisexuality is they can fall in love with shemales/transgenders/masculine lesbians and feminine gays and w.e other labels that people like to put themselves in.

 

I'm bisexual, and I'll date people of any gender or none at all...

 

Not trying to start anything, but "shemale" is not an okay term to use. It is offensive and holds a very negative, fetishistic connotation.

 

I need strong intellectual & emotional connections. Sometimes, romantic ones. I never know who might spark me those ways. I'm open to all sorts of people. I do consider myself pan. Though I do find some people attractive & even enjoy sex at times, it's much less about that for me. In fact, I'm really not that interested in c*cks or p*ssies overall.

 

I'm so confused.

 

There are people who identify as "shemales" but not as transsexuals. They are male-identified, but want to present full-time as the opposite sex...I've heard a variety of reasons for this (several of which are indeed fetishist).

So while it is certainly an offensive term to apply to transsexuals or other transgender groups...they exist and call themselves by that name.

My *sense* was that Spirit was not equating them with "transgenders" (now *that* is a term *I* find a bit off-putting...transgender is an adjective, not a noun), but simply including them in a list with other groups.

 

There have been many helpful answers in this thread and thank you for posting it!

I only recently learned the term pansexual. I have pretty much always considered myself bisexual because I have felt emotional and sexual attraction to both males and females. My personal view - only my personal view! - is that the term "pansexual" may have arisen for a couple of purposes. One, to specifically include attraction to people falling more in the middle of the male-female spectrum (and even that spectrum is a subject of its own!) and two (this is my reason), to indicate that genitalia and/or gender are not a defining characteristic of those one is attracted to. That is, other characteristics are much higher on the scale of priorities than genitalia or gender. But I think as with all words, this word is in the process of evolving as our understanding of attraction is evolving. Heck, when I was first aware of not being straight, there were really only straight vs. homosexual as options, and bisexuality was pretty "out there." But, I'm old.

 

^Pretty much spot on. I'd say pansexuality is both of these things.

 

To me, pansexual doesn't mean that one would be in any way "genderblind" or just not care about their partners gender. I'd actually never get involved with somebody who saw it that way, because gender IS important to me. It also seems a little bit off, like claiming not to see race, when it's clearly an oppressive structure.
Just because you like all kinds of fruit doesn't mean you can't distinguish them, right? (!)