• BarrelAgedBoredom@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    2 days ago

    Bisexuals have a cooler flag, pretty sure that’s the only difference. Otherwise they’re both labels that fail to adequately describe the infinitely personal and variable elements of human attraction and sexuality. Use whichever one feels right. I flip between bi and pan when labeling myself but omnisexual probably “fits” the best

    • ebc@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      46
      ·
      2 days ago

      Problem: There are 2 competing labels for universal attraction

      Solution: “Omnisexual should represent universal attraction”

      Problem: there are 3 competing labels for universal attraction

    • Madagaskar_sky@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      2 days ago

      Oh look what you’ve done now. You’ve made it worse. Omnisexual? Now there’s three terms confuddling the concept.

    • Caveman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      Isn’t that just changing it from the Greek pan prefix to Latin omni prefix, both meaning all?

      • BarrelAgedBoredom@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        Omnisexuality is differentiated from bi/pan in recognizing the role of gender in attraction, and expresses a.preference for certain genders over others. For example, I’m mostly attracted to fem, queer, or androgynous presenting people, and not particularly drawn to masc people. I am attracted to some men (amab or.afab), but not to the same degree as I am with other gender expressions