Thank you Sam. This sounds a great deal like it would partially define the attitudes of a great many Masters of BDSM (including myself) in that the gender of the individual submissive is unimportant. Indeed, it is the discipline and surrender of the fledgling that is of great significance. I do not consider myself bisexual, but omni sexual, in that if they are acceptable for training, I will take them to a deeper understanding that transcends the meanings of just sex, and coming for your partner. Gender to many of us, is irrelevant and has no bearing on the discipline in its' true nature, a more carnal connection. ~Chainz
Thank you Sam. This sounds a great deal like it would partially define the attitudes of a great many Masters of BDSM (including myself) in that the gender of the individual submissive is unimportant. Indeed, it is the discipline and surrender of the fledgling that is of great significance. I do not consider myself bisexual, but omni sexual, in that if they are acceptable for training, I will take them to a deeper understanding that transcends the meanings of just sex, and coming for your partner. Gender to many of us, is irrelevant and has no bearing on the discipline in its' true nature.
pretty much. nowadays its 'cool' 'hip' to be any of the following: 1) bisexual, especially if you're female! 2) vegan! go whole foods! 3) hipsters who look like they found their clothes but really they are very expensive 4) PANSEXUAL! Whooooa! Awesome!
I think I like the idea of Pansexuality, and I think I could be. My ex is trans FTM but that could be included in bisexual attraction as well, or as homosexual attraction even, which is what I most strongly identify as. I sometimes label myself pan curious. Either way I love the idea of going beyond bi into categories of gender that are neither male nor female
"gender that is neither male or female"???? Assuming that you aren't talking about yeasts, that would require a strong space program.
I guess I'm okay then, 'cause I'm Jewish. Also, make sure that when you discriminate, that you don't discriminate. You mention how sick it is for a man to stick you know what up another's you know what. Ummm....why are females always ignored, even when their alternative sexuality is being criticized? So don't forget about the sick twisted minds of us female bisexuals. Don't we deserve your lauding as well? lol
Apologies if i am going to muck stuff up but this pass quote realy pisses me off - what a bastard - we are who we are and this guy should completely fuck off.
Oh coco, First off, you can't call something dysfunctional that's found in nature, and there are many habitual patterns in several species of homosexuality. Secondly, there are more nerve endings at the rear end than the head of your cock, you're literally sitting on a goldmine, try it sometime. If being sick felt that good, i'd run out in the snow in underwear and pray to die of hypothermia. Thirdly, we do not live in a Christian society. We live in an open society. It's funny how the human race is 160,000 years old, Christianity barely 2,000 and somehow that makes us all Christian society. That's 1% of human history. get off the high horse. And if you feel oppressed because too many guys w/ a flare for style and girls with a pension for cropped hair think that they deserve to be treated like human beings, well then you need to leave the UK and go live in Hell where you can hate and curse all you want. I can assure you, that kind of attitude isn't the one your precious Jesus wants in his realm.
see, posts like this really upset me. it's hard enough for those of us who truly are pan to be accepted in the straight community, let alone the gay community. i feel like i've been discriminated against in both, and it's so difficult to get people to take you seriously when the mindset is that it's a "trend." true, some people claim bisexuality to be hip, but those of us who truly identify/have identified for years are finding it more and more difficult to find a place in the gay community without being questioned by those who should understand what it's like to feel called out.
son. you have 0 posts. are you trying to tell me you went to ALL the hassle of signing up to this site, then logging in, then locating this forum, then this thread, and then once you were surrounded by non-hetero minds, you started getting angry about adoption rights -- a topic NO ONE INTRODUCED TO THIS THREAD. if anyone needs their head examined, its fucking you. if anyone shouldn't be allowed to have kids, IT'S FUCKING YOU ... plus, wrong? dysfunctional? if all species of animals can be homosexual, then how exactly can it be wrong? where oh where do you people get this bullshit from? its not a human phenomenon, and its certainly not a choice. people have a right to be happy with who they are, and shouldn't have to live in fear, and lie about everything that feels right to them, so people like you (and your kids tbh) won't abuse them on a daily basis out of sheer idiocy. AND who the fuck are you to say what is and isn't wrong? you're a fuckin Christian (i assume from your post) you're a mindless drone. you do as the little book tells you to. fuck off. you need shot.
Regardless of how others view it, I see pansexuals as people who have no preference, while bisexuals lean more one way than the other. Bisexuals may swing back and forth, but pansexuals are people who are consistently and equally attracted to both sexes. Any label only holds whatever meaning an individual attaches to it, though, and the same label will surely hold different meanings for different people, so I tend to avoid them whenever I can. I simply refer to myself as Steve. Then again, what is a name besides just another label. I'm sure there are some people who would even make assumptions about me based on my name.
I'd disagree about a couple of things there, biguy. I think, if there were only two genders and nothing in between, "bisexual" and "pansexual" would mean the same thing. Since there are more than two genders (or sexes), the people who want to make this explicit in the label (yes, label! They're not so bad) looked for something other than "bi" (meaning "two"). It translates pretty easily: "two sexes/genders" -> "all sexes/genders". I totally agree that labels will mean different things to different people, but I'd say it's in the best interests of communication to try to be on the same page as everyone else. Makes communication plain old more efficient.
That is false. There are only 2 genders. A transperson is not some kind of "third gender". Well, maybe in the eyes of others, but in the eyes of the transperson themselves, they just see themselves as either male or female. Genderqueers though, dont see themselves as any specific gender. I suppose it depends on who's point of view you're looking at it from. I think most of the general public see transpeople (ones who feel they are born in the wrong body) as some kind of "third gender", or try to tie them to the gender associated with their birth sex. For the transperson themselves though, they just see themselves as male or female, simple as that. As for intersex people, they are biologically both sexes, but most of them identify as one gender only. I think the only people who really fit into a so-called "third gender" are genderqueer people. Intersex people, and people born in the wrong body are not that. Despite what most people might think, gender and biological sex are not intrinsically linked. In fact, they are seperate things. The fact that most people's brain is in harmony with their biological sex does not alter that fact. So there are only 2 genders, though for intersex people, there can be more than 2 sexes, seeing as they have biological components of both sexes. (Though usually one of the sexes' components is more prominent than the other.)
This seems contradictory. It's also the sort of thing I was referring to originally The vast majority of people do identify as male or female, but not all. Hence, "pansexual" meaning something similar to "bisexual", but more inclusive of anyone who, for any reason, does not identify as fitting into a binary gender system. So if I'm attracted to males, females, and also genderqueer people (or whoever), or anyone who identifies as something other than male or female, it seems as though "bisexual" isn't quite the proper term. Edit: also, I wasn't trying to imply that sex and gender were anywhere near the same thing in my earlier post -- but people might argue whether someone who is "bisexual" is attracted to "both sexes" or "both genders". I tried to avoid that can of worms by suggesting that the term could be used either way.
It is a bit contradictory, I guess. I think a lot of people do tie down gender with biological sex. So to them, someone who is attracted to a person who identifies as female, but was born with male sex anatomy (or the opposite way around) is actually gay, not pansexual. Yet others think that being attracted to someone like that does make you pansexual. Me, I think if you're a straight male, and attracted to the female mind, and physical form, then being attracted to a female who once had male sex organs woudn't make you "gay". I think the problem is, lots of people have different ideas about the gender binary system, and what "qualifies" a person to be male or female. Intersex people are probably the ultimate conundrum. (Ironic, as most people are unaware of their existence) But they are probably the real proof that gender is not intrinsically liked to physical sex. If it were, they would identify as male and female. But most intersex people identify as one gender only, despite having biological characteristics of both sexes. So I guess what makes a person "pansexual", would all depend on who you were talking to, as many people have different opinions on what gender is, and what makes it up.
This pretty much sums it up, yes. This is why labels are useful! If people can agree on definitions, that is. But that goes for any word in a language; it's annoying when words are ambiguous, and they're only useful when the meaning of a word is standard among the speakers. Since many of these terms are pretty new to most people, even if they describe ideas that have been around for a long time, it's natural that they haven't quite gotten established/standardized yet. Even saying "sex is physical, gender is mental" is an oversimplification, which is kind of unfortunate. Even an intersex person, born with genitalia that doesn't fit in to "male" or "female" has a particular set of chromosomes; some would say that XY and XX definitively puts that person into one category or another. But wait! There's more! There's not just XX and XY, there's XXY and XXX (ha, ha) and others! http://www.messybeast.com/mosaicism2.htm Maybe it's just out of convenience, but I tend to just not care much about physical sex and focus on how the person identifies; after all, they'd know best. So, if a person says "I'm male", he's male in my mind -- simple as that. If they say "I don't know" or "neither", then fine with me. I haven't come across many situations where this approach causes problems, other than specifically discussing my POV with others
Just curious, what would it mean to be sexually attracted to both genders, transsexuals, hermaphrodites ect. but be only romantically interested in the opposite sex? Would that be pansexual, bisexual or?
Whether it is oversimplification or not, it is a fact that gender cannot, at least not always, be completely tied down to biological sex. Just because most of the general public believe this to be so, doesn't mean that it is. It is true there are many other chromosomal setups other than XX/XY (It is also possible to have XX males, and XY females, biologically speaking. Anyone who doesnt believe this, can simply do the research, and see for themselves.) Most intersex people are either anatomically and/or biologically a mix of the two sexes. Knowing that this is the case, how do you assign said person's gender, purely based on the strict gender criteria that most believe is the only one available? Lots of intersex babies had operations forced on them after birth to make them appear as if completely one sex, as doctors suggest leaving them untreated, opens them up to bullying at school, and ostracision from society if they are left as they are. Needless to say, a lot of these kids feel the opposite sex/gender, to the one assigned to them by doctors and/or parents. Then of course, you have gender in brain structure. Males and females have significant differences in certain areas of the brain. It has been shown up that some "mtf transsexuals", have in fact, a brain more congurent with what a female should have. In the same test, gay men were shown to have no difference in brain structure compared to straight males. At least in relation to gender. Seeing as the brain is a biological organ, (just because it is not visible to the naked eye, is no reason to disregard it's relevance to someone's gender) is it fair to brand someone a certain gender purely on their genitalia, when their brain is in fact, of the opposite sex? Perhaps saying gender is 100% mental is oversimplification, but then it is also true that saying gender is 100% based on physical sex anatomy is also oversimplification. Even taking people's own personal feelings out of it, there is enough scientific and medical evidence to show that even biologically, gender (and even physical sex) is not as cut and dried as most people seem to think it is. Seeing as women and men have differences in brain structure, is it not feasible to say their brain structure is part of what makes them the gender they are? And if so, then that would make some transsexuals at least, have some biological component of the opposite sex. (Though I suppose it could then be argued that said people are in fact intersex, and not transsexual.) I think pansexual people simply dont care about the gender of a person. They fall in love with the essence and spirit of the person, the person's physical body is actually very much secondary, and indeed not very important to them at all. I think this is essentially what pansexuality is. Questions like the above "are transsexuals really the opposite sex as they claim", and "what gender is a hermaphrodite" (because hermaphrodite/intersex, is NOT a gender, it is the physical sex of the person. Probably the ultimate proof that gender and physical sex are in fact seperate things. The fact that most people's gender falls into line with their physical sex does not change this from being a fact.) are really meaningless to pansexual people, because their physical sex/gender is completely irrelevant to said person's attractiveness. This is how I see it anyway. And if so, the world would probably be a much harmonious place if everyone was pansexual. lol That's narrow minded, not matter what sexuality it is. I cant see the logic to that, unless you are of the belief that all people of a certain sex and/or gender has the same personality. Especially when a lot of trans or hermaphrodite people do not disclose being so. So in saying that, I think a lot of people have been romantically attracted to members of the above groups without realising that they were. Upon realising this, they break up with said person because of this fact. I dont think its a fact that straights cant be romantically attracted to those people, its purely fear that would prevent them from being so.
