• TerHu@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    23 hours ago

    absolutely, and therefore i like the def of HalfSalesman. It nicely distinguishes between pan and bi, whilst avoiding any dated anti-trans ideas.

      • TerHu@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        12 hours ago

        it’s in this comment section: https://vger.to/lemmy.world/comment/25858715

        Pansexual: Attracted to people regardless of gender characteristics.

        “Pan” because gender is functionally irrelevant. Any and all genders accepted because it doesn’t matter.

        Bisexual: Attracted to multiple genders specifically because of their gender characteristics.

        “Bi” in the sense of being “bi-directional” in attraction, usually attracted to specific gender traits and as a result not all genders, just more than one.

        For instance, I’m finsexual, which is a subcategory of bisexual because it describes specific gender elements that I am attracted to but is not a sub category of pansexual as a result.

        • Vivian@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          12 hours ago

          Ok yeah that makes sense. The way I’ve conceptualized it is that pan is attracted to all genders or to people regardless of gender and bi is attracted to two or more genders. I think the way that commenter phrased it is a great way to think about it