Honestly it seems like a generational divide between the two labels.
I think this is it. At one point, when I was hanging around queer spaces on the internets, it was inclusive and preferred to use “pan” instead of “bi”, but then few years later it flipped around. Same with writing LGBTQA*, which was then preferred as inclusive, but few years later apparently the asterisk made it non-inclusive instead.
Personally, I treat the labels more like a fashion thing now, since they come and go, and the “polite” ones change. So if I want to hang around queer spaces, I will just read up what is okay at the moment. Usually I do not anymore, though, since I absorbed into my spine, from the earlier internet days, that asexuals are not welcome (“A is for Ally”). I know that changed later as well, but at that point I had grown too tired, to talk about queer stuff.
I’ve heard a ton of different definitions, but honestly I think people just pick the label they like better and there isn’t a functional difference. I identify as bisexual because the flag is better haha.
I used to feel the same about the flag, but at some point it grew on me
…along with 2014 techno music, osu, sparkledogs and shiny glass like UIs. Dunno if it’s connected
I am convinced that they are the same thing and the only difference is the label itself. Any definitions I’ve seen are either equivalent, or denigrating to one of the labels and unrepresentative of how many people use them. Regardless of the history, trying to hammer down that one must be used over the other is a waste of time.
This is transphobic because it insinuates that trans people are some third gender rather than their actual gender. There is nothing about bisexuality or the “bi” prefix that would imply that bi people are only attracted to cis people unless you believe that trans and cis people are separate genders.
Nonbinary people, on the other hand, I can see how “bi means two” can be conflated to mean bisexuals can’t be attracted to nonbinary people although I think that ignores the history of the term bisexual, as well as ignores the reality of nonbinary genders, i.e. you can’t necessarily tell someone is nonbinary by looking at them. I think when people say they’re “not attracted to nonbinary people” if they’re not bigoted they likely mean something like not being attracted to androgyny, but not all nonbinary people present androgynously.
Not all trans people pass, and some trans people don’t exhibit their gender in a way someone else would like.
Some do pass. How would those people who think they aren’t attracted to trans people even know until clothes come off? And even then, they might not be able to tell if a person is trans, cis, or intersex.
It’s like when people say they aren’t attracted to bisexual men. It’s personal preference rooted in bigotry, even if they’re not conscious of it.
Because the only trans people they personally know are ones they aren’t attracted to?
That doesn’t mean they won’t be attracted to any and all trans people.
There’s nothing different about a bisexual man and a straight man when it comes to dating. If someone doesn’t like bisexual men because bisexual men are also attracted to men, that is a preference rooted in homophobia.
That has nothing to do with being bisexual or not though. I might not be into bodybuilders “exhibiting their masculinity” by being absurdly jacked, but that doesn’t make me not bisexual. I’m just not attracted to that particular gender presentation.
I think when people say “I’m not attracted to trans people” they have a particular idea of a trans person in their head, but plenty of trans people pass and some go “stealth”. “We can always tell” is patently false. I suppose I can imagine a person who is so caught up in gender who would be turned off if they found out someone is trans, but I find it difficult to imagine anyone not asexual who wouldn’t find some trans person initially attractive, at least post-op.
I agree with your last point though. At this point I’ve mostly given up on pansexual/bisexual and just call myself queer.
That makes me hesitant to ever identify as bisexual though and honestly that makes me really sad. I’ve become quite attached to bisexuality as a part of my identity and adhere to the definition @TwiddleTwaddle@lemmy.blahaj.zone used here:
the bi part of bisexual refers to both homosexual (same gender) and heterosexual (different gender) so nobody’s left out. I guess an argument could be made that an agender person might not fit under either umbrella, but i would still consider agender to be either same gender (if the bisexual person is also agender) or different gender (if the bisexual person is not agender).
I would just hate to signal to anyone not cis that I’m rejecting them based on my own identity.
Edit: Ugh you? Yeah I’m not going to go with your definition of anything with comments like these in your history
I like interacting with butch (not sure if that term is still in vogue, havent had the courage to ask) lesbians, they’re never as bitter as the fems.
All of this is just retroactive attempts to delineate the two labels after the concept of being transgender started to become understood by a wider portion of the public (and the queer community, for that matter). Don’t let faux-academic definitions define your identity. If “bisexual” feels like it fits but gender-nonconforming, agender, androgynous-presenting, and/or genderfluid people are also your thing, that’s entirely fine.
(Edit: and it doesn’t in any way invalidate other people’s self-labeling when they categorize it differently to you. Labels are only there to simplify communication of ideas. They’re not a sports team.)
I think that distinction just grew up with the current trend of trans-exclusion. I identify as bi and my bi club is explicitly inclusive of trans and NB folk. The transphobes will have to pry the ol’ pink and blue from my cold dead sexy bisexual hands.
I would just hate to signal to anyone not cis that I’m rejecting them based on my own identity.
That would imply being anything other than pansexual is wrong and discriminatory, period.
It’s worth stressing that it’s perfectly fine to reject someone as a potential partner for any reason or even for no reason at all. For example if you find white women more attractive than black women, I don’t think it makes you racist if that’s just about attraction, not respect.
You mean like how you have no idea if I’m a man or a woman? Funny how it’s one set of rules for you and another for me.
Edit: To clarify, this isn’t a “You can’t define what a woman is” thing, it’s a “this user loves to make assumptions about me and is mad when I do the same” thing.
I never said that. I said all the ones I encountered have been that way. There’s probably loads of fem lesbians that are cool, that don’t make their issues (or lack thereof) my problem. I’ve probably talked to a few that didn’t even feel the need to bring up their sexuality.
Edit: As always, you’re jumping the gun and assuming my beliefs and positions so you have a punching bag.
I’m gen z and consider myself pan because the flag colors look like an ocean sunset and yummy ice cream. And also because gender is irrelevant to me in regards to attraction.
I think the most reasonable definition is that bi means you are into either and pan means you don’t care. So bi means you have two “prototypes” you’re into, one male and one female, and pan means your “prototype” is not gendered. Having a gendered prototype doesn’t mean it excludes trans people. A trans person can be close enough to either or both, depending on their state of transition and your focus. I hope I’m making sense.
As a bisexual girlie, would someone let me know what the true difference is when it’s figured out??
Honestly it seems like a generational divide between the two labels.
“Honestly it seems like a generational divide between the two labels.”
Yup pretty much exactly it.
Pansexual means attracted to all genders, bi is more than one. All pansexuals are bisexuals, not all bisexuals are pansexuals.
I think this is it. At one point, when I was hanging around queer spaces on the internets, it was inclusive and preferred to use “pan” instead of “bi”, but then few years later it flipped around. Same with writing LGBTQA*, which was then preferred as inclusive, but few years later apparently the asterisk made it non-inclusive instead.
Personally, I treat the labels more like a fashion thing now, since they come and go, and the “polite” ones change. So if I want to hang around queer spaces, I will just read up what is okay at the moment. Usually I do not anymore, though, since I absorbed into my spine, from the earlier internet days, that asexuals are not welcome (“A is for Ally”). I know that changed later as well, but at that point I had grown too tired, to talk about queer stuff.
I’ve heard a ton of different definitions, but honestly I think people just pick the label they like better and there isn’t a functional difference. I identify as bisexual because the flag is better haha.
Exactly. Just pick whatever flag has colors that you like then go sleep with whoever you are attracted to. It doesn’t have to be complicated.
bi is also one character less to type
Say you’re a Linux user without saying you’re a Linux user
Efficiency is important
Wy many leter when fewer leter do the tric?!
The bisexual flag is SO much better. You get it haha
vexilosexual
this.
I used to feel the same about the flag, but at some point it grew on me
…along with 2014 techno music, osu, sparkledogs and shiny glass like UIs. Dunno if it’s connected
Bi here. Generally, attracted to men and women for the characteristics they have.
Pan is more that they’re attracted to people regardless of their sex. Like, it doesn’t really play into it.
I am convinced that they are the same thing and the only difference is the label itself. Any definitions I’ve seen are either equivalent, or denigrating to one of the labels and unrepresentative of how many people use them. Regardless of the history, trying to hammer down that one must be used over the other is a waste of time.
Removed by mod
This is transphobic because it insinuates that trans people are some third gender rather than their actual gender. There is nothing about bisexuality or the “bi” prefix that would imply that bi people are only attracted to cis people unless you believe that trans and cis people are separate genders.
Nonbinary people, on the other hand, I can see how “bi means two” can be conflated to mean bisexuals can’t be attracted to nonbinary people although I think that ignores the history of the term bisexual, as well as ignores the reality of nonbinary genders, i.e. you can’t necessarily tell someone is nonbinary by looking at them. I think when people say they’re “not attracted to nonbinary people” if they’re not bigoted they likely mean something like not being attracted to androgyny, but not all nonbinary people present androgynously.
Removed by mod
Some do pass. How would those people who think they aren’t attracted to trans people even know until clothes come off? And even then, they might not be able to tell if a person is trans, cis, or intersex.
It’s like when people say they aren’t attracted to bisexual men. It’s personal preference rooted in bigotry, even if they’re not conscious of it.
Removed by mod
That doesn’t mean they won’t be attracted to any and all trans people.
There’s nothing different about a bisexual man and a straight man when it comes to dating. If someone doesn’t like bisexual men because bisexual men are also attracted to men, that is a preference rooted in homophobia.
Removed by mod
I’m not trans, but ok.
That’s the point. They don’t know either. So to assume that every single trans person is not attractive to them is an assumption based in bigotry.
They can overlap a lot depending on the person.
That has nothing to do with being bisexual or not though. I might not be into bodybuilders “exhibiting their masculinity” by being absurdly jacked, but that doesn’t make me not bisexual. I’m just not attracted to that particular gender presentation.
I think when people say “I’m not attracted to trans people” they have a particular idea of a trans person in their head, but plenty of trans people pass and some go “stealth”. “We can always tell” is patently false. I suppose I can imagine a person who is so caught up in gender who would be turned off if they found out someone is trans, but I find it difficult to imagine anyone not asexual who wouldn’t find some trans person initially attractive, at least post-op.
I agree with your last point though. At this point I’ve mostly given up on pansexual/bisexual and just call myself queer.
I really like that the LGBT+ community has rallied around reclaiming the word “queer”.
Removed by mod
That makes me hesitant to ever identify as bisexual though and honestly that makes me really sad. I’ve become quite attached to bisexuality as a part of my identity and adhere to the definition @TwiddleTwaddle@lemmy.blahaj.zone used here:
I would just hate to signal to anyone not cis that I’m rejecting them based on my own identity.
Edit: Ugh you? Yeah I’m not going to go with your definition of anything with comments like these in your history
All of this is just retroactive attempts to delineate the two labels after the concept of being transgender started to become understood by a wider portion of the public (and the queer community, for that matter). Don’t let faux-academic definitions define your identity. If “bisexual” feels like it fits but gender-nonconforming, agender, androgynous-presenting, and/or genderfluid people are also your thing, that’s entirely fine.
(Edit: and it doesn’t in any way invalidate other people’s self-labeling when they categorize it differently to you. Labels are only there to simplify communication of ideas. They’re not a sports team.)
<3
I think that distinction just grew up with the current trend of trans-exclusion. I identify as bi and my bi club is explicitly inclusive of trans and NB folk. The transphobes will have to pry the ol’ pink and blue from my cold dead sexy bisexual hands.
Hell yeah!
That would imply being anything other than pansexual is wrong and discriminatory, period.
It’s worth stressing that it’s perfectly fine to reject someone as a potential partner for any reason or even for no reason at all. For example if you find white women more attractive than black women, I don’t think it makes you racist if that’s just about attraction, not respect.
I would hate to signal it because I am personally attracted to cis and trans people, but still like to identify as bisexual. That’s all :)
Yeah, you’re definitely not proving me wrong on that.
You have no idea if I’m butch or fem.
You mean like how you have no idea if I’m a man or a woman? Funny how it’s one set of rules for you and another for me.
Edit: To clarify, this isn’t a “You can’t define what a woman is” thing, it’s a “this user loves to make assumptions about me and is mad when I do the same” thing.
It’s bigoted as fuck to assert that all butch lesbians are cool and all fem lesbians are bitter.
I never said that. I said all the ones I encountered have been that way. There’s probably loads of fem lesbians that are cool, that don’t make their issues (or lack thereof) my problem. I’ve probably talked to a few that didn’t even feel the need to bring up their sexuality.
Edit: As always, you’re jumping the gun and assuming my beliefs and positions so you have a punching bag.
Assuming that I’m fem because you don’t get along with me is a bigoted way of thinking.
who assumed that you are a man?
Removed by mod
it’s the internet nobody cares who you are or who is slandering you lol
you’re not that important
I’m gen z and consider myself pan because the flag colors look like an ocean sunset and yummy ice cream. And also because gender is irrelevant to me in regards to attraction.
I respect choosing the label because of the flag haha
That actually makes me appreciate the pan flag more! It does kinda look like an ocean sunset :)
I think the most reasonable definition is that bi means you are into either and pan means you don’t care. So bi means you have two “prototypes” you’re into, one male and one female, and pan means your “prototype” is not gendered. Having a gendered prototype doesn’t mean it excludes trans people. A trans person can be close enough to either or both, depending on their state of transition and your focus. I hope I’m making sense.
I like that a lot :)
My personaly definition is:
bi is attracted to people of multiple genders (could be all or could be limited to specific ones)
Pan is attracted to people regardless of gender entirely. Gender simply isnt a factor when it comes to attraction.
I personally am far more in the Pan side of things but I rep the Bi flag because its much much better.
How willing are you to date an 𒀭𒀀𒉣𒈾?
If you’re, welcome panie.
If you’rent, you’re still bi.