pansexuality?

[Rooni321]

In all respects to the pansexuals out there, I just need some clarification on what it means to be pansexual.
I mean, I see a lot of people throw in the fact that they can love others who trans whether or not they are FtM or MtF but wouldn't we want to respect that they are now females or males?
The way pansexuality is described it makes it seem like people who are trans are of a different species or 3rd gender.
What I really want to know is how far it really is from bisexuality?
People also include the fact that pansexuals can love any one of any race but we don't can racists who are straight another name.
Somebody please,
EXPLAIN. Lol

And I hope I'm not offending anybody. I've just been curious ever since I heard about it.

[Owen]

The best answer I've ever been able to find is that bisexuals can only be sexually attracted to men and women, while pansexuals can be attracted to men, women, FtM people, MtF people, intersex people, etc. While I think many people would want to respect the fact that a FtM person is a now physically male and a MtF person is now physically female, it doesn't always work that way. I have a FtM friend who has told me that bisexuals have not found him attractive once his clothes are off because of his transexualism, but pansexuals have, and I think that therein lies the significant practical difference between the two.

[Ridiculous]

Pansexuals don't put any distinction on sexual characteristics/gender expression when it comes to attraction. Instead, potential partners are analysed on an individual basis.

On the other hand bisexuals, while they are attracted to both males and females, usually have some specific characteristics of each gender that they are attracted to, and may approach a relationship with one different to how they would with the other.


As Owen said this difference becomes most apparent when the other person is outside the sex/gender binary (trans, inter etc.).

[Mogget]

Honestly? I think the pansexual identity is about avoiding the negative connotations that have come to be associated with the bisexual label. And there are a lot of those. The lesbian and gay communities have historically not been very accepting of bi people, seeing them as liars about their "true" homosexuality, too scared to be identified as gay, as traitors to the cause, as really straight and only into the same sex for NSA sex, as unfaithful, as sluts, etc.

I haven't heard a lot of bisexuals comment on some huge difference between their attraction to men vs women, and plenty of them are attracted to people outside of the gender binary. In fact, I think the common definition of pansexual is probably quite insulting to a number of bisexual-identified people.

My preferred definition of bisexual is not that bi refers to two genders, but to two orientations, homosexual (towards the same sex) and heterosexual (towards other sexes).

[thedreamwatch]

Originally Posted by Liam

Honestly? I think the pansexual identity is about avoiding the negative connotations that have come to be associated with the bisexual label. And there are a lot of those. The lesbian and gay communities have historically not been very accepting of bi people, seeing them as liars about their "true" homosexuality, too scared to be identified as gay, as traitors to the cause, as really straight and only into the same sex for NSA sex, as unfaithful, as sluts, etc.

I haven't heard a lot of bisexuals comment on some huge difference between their attraction to men vs women, and plenty of them are attracted to people outside of the gender binary. In fact, I think the common definition of pansexual is probably quite insulting to a number of bisexual-identified people.

My preferred definition of bisexual is not that bi refers to two genders, but to two orientations, homosexual (towards the same sex) and heterosexual (towards other sexes).

I tend to agree with Liam on this one. I'm not going to start a label war or anything and people can differentiate if they like, but I know plenty of bi people who define themselves using the same measurements as pansexual people. So, I guess it's all about how one feels about the label for themselves.

[Messed Up]

THAT’S what pansexuality is!? That sounds awesome! Everyone should be pansexual then! The world would be to tolerant if it was!

[Mogget]

People would also be more tolerant if everyone was homosexual or heterosexual. Tolerance is only meaningful in a diverse world.

[Ianthe]

Most people I've met who consider themselves bisexual describe their attraction as being to the person regardless of gender. Occasionally, I meet one who says they like specific different male and female traits.

Although I think a lot of people prefer the "pansexual" label for the reasons Liam describes, I think it originally developed because some people who don't identify as male OR female felt that the term "bisexual" ignored their existence or excluded them.

Almost all the bisexuals I have ever met or spoken to are willing to date trans people.

I also have a friend who refers to himself as "omnisexual." He distinguishes this from what he thinks "bisexual" means, but I can't see any difference between the way he describes his sexuality, and the way bisexuals and pansexuals describe theirs.

However, using "pansexual" or "omnisexual" does usually mean that the person has specifically considered transgender and gender queer people, and has chosen to purposely, explicitly use a term that includes them. Some people who identify as bisexual may have never really considered whether they are attracted to transgender people, although many have.

I consider pansexuality to be a type of bisexuality--not all bisexuals could be described as pansexuals, but all pansexuals could be described as bisexual. The term is used by people who want it to be really clear that they are open to transgender and gender queer partners.

[Mad Man L]

As a bisexual, I can't say that trans people really appeal to me. I have a tendency to stick somewhat within the gender binary.

'Pansexual' means they can be attracted regardless of what is downstairs and how they are 'formed' and whatnot. Bisexual means mostly within gender boundaries. That's my personal take on it.

[fiddledeedee]

As far as I can tell, a pansexual is equivilant to a Kinsey 3, i.e., has no preference for any gender identity over another. I am a bisexual between 2 and 4, but it varies; I don't know why. Therefore, I do not identify as pansexual as I usually have a preference for someone. I don't restrict my bisexuality to the gender binary, though I can understand why some do and even think that it can be accurate.

Meh, I guess I don't really understand anything. It doesn't make sense in words. XD

[thedreamwatch]

Originally Posted by Ianthe

I consider pansexuality to be a type of bisexuality--not all bisexuals could be described as pansexuals, but all pansexuals could be described as bisexual. The term is used by people who want it to be really clear that they are open to transgender and gender queer partners.

Whoa, this is the most logical and clear explanation of pansexuality and bisexuality I have ever heard. You are awesome.

[MyJunkIsYou]

My attraction is regardless of gender, can include people who are trans, intersex and genderqueer- but I still identify as bisexual.

I think the fact that some people view bisexuality as excluding people who are trans* in some ways is a little ignorant. In my understanding, a person who is FTM would still be included in the definition of male because quite simply they are.

I'm all for choosing the label you feel fits best, but that's my definition of bisexuality. It's unfortunate that pansexuality implies that bisexuality must follow gender binaries when I don't think it does.

[SammieG16]

Originally Posted by thedreamwatch

Whoa, this is the most logical and clear explanation of pansexuality and bisexuality I have ever heard. You are awesome.

Its like how all squares are rectangels, but not all rectangels are squares!

[Hot Pink]

Originally Posted by thedreamwatch

Whoa, this is the most logical and clear explanation of pansexuality and bisexuality I have ever heard. You are awesome.

I agree. It's difficult for transpeople to know who's interested or not. The dating scene can be a bit of a minefield for us.

[Hexagon]

The way I see it, pansexuality is loving both genders (and I include transpeople in that) and intersex people, and basically any variation of that, but so is bisexuality (some people don't feel that way, but I do). The difference lies in the way we are attracted to/love people. I think pansexuality is slightly more emotional and fluid.

I have yet to decide whether I'm bi or pan. I think bi though. Although I definitly like transpeople.

[Rooni321]

So its basically up to the person to decide??
Ahhh there's so much thinking involved!!

[Owen]

Originally Posted by MyJunkIsYou

I think the fact that some people view bisexuality as excluding people who are trans* in some ways is a little ignorant. In my understanding, a person who is FTM would still be included in the definition of male because quite simply they are.

I'm all for choosing the label you feel fits best, but that's my definition of bisexuality. It's unfortunate that pansexuality implies that bisexuality must follow gender binaries when I don't think it does.

You say it's unfortunate that the existence of pansexuality implies that bisexuality must follow the gender binary (which, if we're going to use the correct term, should be referred to as the sex binary; gender is in your head, sex is on your body). I find it unfortunate that you assume that all people who identify as bisexual are also attracted to transsexual and intersex people, when many bisexuals (including at least one person in this thread) are not. The fact is that we don't live in a world where everyone who is attracted to men is attracted to post-op FtM transsexuals, and ditto for women and MtF's. While I'm all including FtMs in the definition of male "because quite simply they are", that's not going to change the fact that some people aren't attracted to them. To say that the label of bisexual includes attraction to transsexuals and intersex people is not only not reflective of reality, but it makes the label of bisexual it no different from the label of pansexual, and if they're going to mean the same thing, why even have two labels?

Originally Posted by RubiksCube

The way I see it, pansexuality is loving both genders (and I include transpeople in that) and intersex people, and basically any variation of that, but so is bisexuality (some people don't feel that way, but I do). The difference lies in the way we are attracted to/love people. I think pansexuality is slightly more emotional and fluid.

I think we have a gross misunderstanding of terms here. "Bisexual" and "pansexual" describe which people you are sexually attracted to, whom you would enjoy having sex with, etc. The terms have nothing to do with whom you fall in love with; you're looking for "biromantic" and "panromantic" to describe that. I'm sure there are many bisexuals who are panromantic, but the fact is that bisexuality and pansexuality are not the same thing. To say otherwise is to claim that bisexual people are lying when they say they aren't sexually attracted to transexual and intersex people, or worse, to say that you know what's going on in their head better than they do, which wouldn't make you much different from the people who claim bisexuality doesn't exist at all.

[Rooni321]

Really I'm just seeing the problem as bisexuals are supposed to like both genders/sexes (whatever you may have it) and there are really only men or women so why is there a problem when it comes to trans people? When it comes down to it they are still just men and women. So unless there is a clear dividing line between the two(bi and pan) it makes it seem like bisexuals have some sort of prejudice against trans people. IS that the case? I'm just really stumped.

---------- Post added 17th Oct 2011 at 07:10 PM ----------

Again* I'm not trying to put down anyones sexuality. I accept everyone. I'm just trying to figure out what pansexuality is and how different it is from being bi.

[Owen]

Originally Posted by Rooni321

Really I'm just seeing the problem as bisexuals are supposed to like both genders/sexes (whatever you may have it) and there are really only men or women so why is there a problem when it comes to trans people? When it comes down to it they are still just men and women. So unless there is a clear dividing line between the two(bi and pan) it makes it seem like bisexuals have some sort of prejudice against trans people. IS that the case? I'm just really stumped.

---------- Post added 17th Oct 2011 at 07:10 PM ----------

Again* I'm not trying to put down anyones sexuality. I accept everyone. I'm just trying to figure out what pansexuality is and how different it is from being bi.

Pansexuality is different from being bi because a cis-gendered male's natural penis is different from an FtM transexual's post-op penis. A bisexual won't enjoy the "crafted" penis as much; a pansexual will. When a transexual pulls down their pants and reveals their surgically altered genitalia, or an intersex person pulls down their pants and reveals that they have ambiguous genitalia, or when a pre-op transsexual who presents as their true sex pulls down their pants to reveal that they have genitalia opposite of what you would expect, a bisexual will be turned off, while a pansexual won't.

I have spoken personally with people who are turned off by such occurrences (i.e. who are only attracted to people with the typical genitalia for the sex they present as), and I have spoken personally with people who aren't turned off by such occurrences (i.e. who are attracted to people regardless of any genetalial surprises), so I know that the two sexualities exist as two different orientations. It is most certainly NOT the case that bisexuals are prejudiced against trans people just because they aren't attracted to them, no more than a gay man is prejudiced against women just because he isn't attracted to them.

[Rooni321]

Originally Posted by Owen

I have spoken personally with people who are turned off by such occurrences (i.e. who are only attracted to people with the typical genitalia for the sex they present as), and I have spoken personally with people who aren't turned off by such occurrences (i.e. who are attracted to people regardless of any genetalial surprises), so I know that the two sexualities exist as two different orientations. It is most certainly NOT the case that bisexuals are prejudiced against trans people just because they aren't attracted to them, no more than a gay man is prejudiced against women just because he isn't attracted to them.

I'm not saying that at all. Being gay is WAY different obviously.

I'm just saying that if people who are bisexual are into men AND women then its the same as being capable of loving ANYONE regardless of gender because well, there are only two. And to say that trans people virtually don't count in bisexuality makes no sense. So in turn, bisexuality doesn't seem to hold true to its name because trans people are still either men or women and bisexuals are supposively into men and women. My point is that it seems prejudice against trans people because they are still in fact men or women but bisexuality excludes them.