This is the definition I go by and why I swapped to Pansexual.
Bisexual is attracted to more than one gender and CAN include all the same attractions as a Pansexual.
Pansexual IS attraction to all genders.
So yeah all pansexuals are bisexual but not all bisexuals are pansexuals, they could be trans excluding, that’s sufficiently vague enough that Pansexual is its own thing.
If you’re a trans person on say a dating app that makes all the difference in considering whether or not someone is safe.
If you’re a trans person on say a dating app that makes all the difference in considering whether or not someone is safe.
I still wouldn’t assume anyone labelling themselves as bisexual is an unsafe person for trans people. I think people use bi and pan interchangeably too much to assume anything without talking to the individual.
You’re twisting my words, I said whether or not someone is safe, not that they’re unsafe.
If you can’t confirm that at first look then your only option is better safe than sorry and move on or get into what can very quickly turn into an unpleasant conversation.
There is nuance and what you assume people do is just your own personal experience.
My own experience is I’ve met many a cool bisexual in the right forums. I’ve also seen plenty a bisexual who hate the term pansexual and thinks it’s redundant because they don’t acknowledge the nuance.
That isn’t the kind of person I want to be around.
Sure talking helps but when you’re a pretty hated minority it’s not exactly an attractive proposition to get to know every bisexual.
To relate this back dating apps, if you’re bisexual and down with trans people, let us know on your bio! And if you’re someone who is attracted to all just take the dive and go pansexual! It’s more specific and let’s others know exactly who your interested in.
You’re twisting my words, I said whether or not someone is safe, not that they’re unsafe.
To be pedantic… “Whether or not someone is safe” introduces two options: Safe or not safe. Unsafe and “not safe” are more interchangeable than pansexual and bisexual.
I understand it’s not what you meant… but I dont think they’re twisting your words. I think it’s an honest attempt at faithfully interpreting your words. It’s just that the language isn’t really built for the kind of distinction you’re trying to make.
I’d have to agree with you there, I apologize, it’s English specific but god does English have some issues like that.
To clarify I meant you have no idea of their intentions, so you can’t tell if they have ill or well intentioned thoughts towards you, so for your own sake it’s easier to assume they are not safe. That doesn’t mean they are dangerous but you can’t know for certain.
Except nowhere did I say either are inherently transphobic. I was pointing out that you’re more likely to run into a transphobic person of either of those groups because it’s such a wide encompassing umbrella.
To me it’s no different from saying you’re more likely to run into someone who is homophobic who is straight than someone who is homophobic and bisexual.
As for the racist thing I would say it’s a nonsense thing to say because it’s totally different. I’d say it’s fair that people of color should be wary of white people because because of systemic racism at large has stemmed from white supremacy. Are there people of color who are racist, absolutely, are people of color with internalized racism, absolutely. Should I be the one who should be talking about this, absolutely not nor am I comfortar with it but you brought us to race.
More than anything I’m sick of having to explain and re-explain that some communities and sexualities are more risky for trans people than others.
If they weren’t it wouldn’t be fucking normalized that trans people need to disclaim themselves being transgender with their partners for their own safety.
I’m refuting that bisexual people are inherently more risky to trans people by virtue of being bisexual.
There is nothing wrong with being bisexual but the issue is it has similar baggage as being straight which is that there are people within it thay do not believe transgender people are the gender they say they are.
Why does being bisexual have similar baggage as straight people that make them more transphobic than pansexual people?
How do you not see that you’re stereotyping groups of people based on their sexual orientation?
I also disagree for the fact that bisexuality is wide encompassing and normalized. It’s a term you don’t need to understand that there are more than two genders to use.
You see in this very thread plenty of misunderstandings as to the definition to the extent that one person said they thought it meant attraction to both men and women. That one seems to be the most popular I’ve seen which is an issue because of how cis normative it is.
The actual bisexual definition is inclusive and I’m not calling bisexuals evil. I’m saying because of that inclusivity it also includes more problematic people. Different communities have different definitions of bisexual and it just so happens liking both men and women perfectly fits the actual definition of bisexual just as much as say a more conservative and narrow viewed of it.
You don’t have to believe me but I’ve seen that community and I’ve been on the internet long enough to know not to assume just because we’re both queer that the other person is an ally.
So, I’ll start by saying that it’s pretty on brand for this meme post lol, but there are multiple definitions of bisexuality and pansexuality I find acceptable. There are some that are bullshit. I don’t really subscribe to one true definition of it. I have one I use the most that I’ll talk about later in this post. This is what I take issue with, see emphasis.
Bisexual is attracted to more than one gender and CAN include all the same attractions as a Pansexual.
Pansexual IS attraction to all genders.
So yeah all pansexuals are bisexual but not all bisexuals are pansexuals, they could be trans excluding, that’s sufficiently vague enough that Pansexual is its own thing.
This is either biphobic by assuming bisexuals are not accepting of trans people or transphobic by viewing trans men as a different gender than cis men (same for trans women and cis women). That’s why I have a problem with it. Bisexuality has never meant that.
Someone else in this thread has already mentioned the bisexual manifesto from 1990. Now, to be clear, this isn’t me saying “hey, it’s called the bisexual manifesto, it’s the one true definition of bisexuality.” (It itself even says its not.) But I find this part relevant when discussing multiple definitions.
Do not expect each magazine to be representative of all bisexuals, for our diversity is too vast. Do not expect a clear-cut definition of bisexuality to jump out from the pages. We bisexuals tend to define bisexuality in ways that are unique to our own individuality. There are as many definitions of bisexuality as there are bisexuals. Many of us choose not to label ourselves anything at all, and find the word ‘bisexual’ to be inadequate and too limiting. Do not assume that the opinions expressed are shared by all bisexuals, […]
So even in 1990 it was understood by bisexuals that bisexuals did not have a single “one true definition” of bisexuality. Not to even mention pansexuality and what shape the venn diagram of the two might make.
Me, personally, the definition I use, that I feel I see many people use and also I have some bias towards because I feel it’s the most satisfying is that pansexuals are attracted to traits of people without regards to gender. While bisexuals are attracted to any gender of people and may have traits they find attractive in some genders but not others. And the example I always give of this is, someone who is bi, but not pan, might find muscular women attractive, but dislike muscles on men. Meanwhile, someone who is pan would just like muscles regardless.
Another definition I use, but perhaps less useful to answer you, is that bisexuals are people who identify as bisexual. Pansexuals are people who identify as pansexual. And yes, people can identify as both or only one. I think self identification in the queer community is massively important. I have a friend who’s wife came out as nonbinary. He calls himself straight. So when people ask me what his sexuality is, I say he’s straight. Is there a part of me that believes in some technical, theoretical sense that he should consider labeling himself as something else? Sure, yeah, because his wife is nonbinary now, but that’s not really my business unless he asked me about it.
First off thanks for writing up such a detailed answer while touching on the history of bisexuality.
is either biphobic by assuming bisexuals are not accepting of trans people or transphobic by viewing trans men as a different gender than cis men
Believe me that is not what meant to say but I have be paying from the nose for wording it like that. It more has to do with how bisexuality is defined differently for different people and how that relates to right leaning groups where bisexuals can pass.
Another definition I use, but perhaps less useful to answer
It’s totally useful, a bit frustrating in a way that makes it feel like there’s an itch I can’t scratch but I agree and also think it’s something to be left alone. Let sleeping dogs lie and frankly questioning people on their identity is more likely to cause more problems and strain the relationship more than it will solve.
I actually think it’s fine to question people on their identity, the only person who can really tell you why they identify as what they identify is them. There’s some nuance of course, and you don’t want to pry or seem like you’re trying to convince them they’ve used the wrong label, but I think it’s fine to ask folks.
I’ll try to give a good example. The context of this thread is all of us discussing the difference. It’s a bit different than asking a singular person why they may have chose one over the other. A very close person to me chooses the pan label over the bi label because of a reason I personally disagree with and view as biphobic. They choose it because they don’t want trans and nonbinary people who subscribe to the biphobic definition to believe they’re transphobic or enbyphobic. My response to this is not “that’s biphobic, you shouldn’t do that.” Because the only real conclusion from that would be that I’m saying “You should call yourself bisexual” which would be relabeling them. Now, this specific conversation, it vent on, and all of us having the conversation are on the same page about it all, for the most part. We all agree there is massive, massive overlap between the two and the label doesn’t really matter too too much, and all of us would be fine saying we’re “bi/pan” probably. If our opinions were more unaligned on the topic, it may have gone differently. Especially if this person said that I am transphobic or enbyphobic for saying I am bisexual, but that’s not something they did and it’s not something they believe. Also, we did all say that the flag we preferred played a bit of a role lmao. The two of us that are bi love the bi color and the the one who is pan loves the pan colors.
I guess for me, going back to the dating app analogy, I’d rather label myself what I am (bisexual) and have people who have biphobic takes that assume I am transphobic/enbyphobic pass on me than relabel myself to accommodate them. Because I don’t think we’d necessarily be able to get along anyways. I think if someone is that opposed to the label found out I called myself pan instead of bi on my profile just to get into their DMs, it would also just push them further into biphobia and they’d unmatch with me anyways.
I think this is why this meme is so hilarious, bi versus pan just sort of carries on and on and rarely leads to satisfying conclusions. But I think there’s beauty there, I think the queer experience is so unique and I love to learn about people and also have others learn about me. I love discussions.
I didn’t say that was the difference though? I specifically stated that bisexuals are attracted to more than one gender and pansexuals are attracted to all.
All pansexuals are bisexuals not all bisexuals are pan.
So yeah all pansexuals are bisexual but not all bisexuals are pansexuals, they could be trans excluding, that’s sufficiently vague enough that Pansexual is its own thing.
This is the definition I go by and why I swapped to Pansexual.
Bisexual is attracted to more than one gender and CAN include all the same attractions as a Pansexual.
Pansexual IS attraction to all genders.
So yeah all pansexuals are bisexual but not all bisexuals are pansexuals, they could be trans excluding, that’s sufficiently vague enough that Pansexual is its own thing.
If you’re a trans person on say a dating app that makes all the difference in considering whether or not someone is safe.
I still wouldn’t assume anyone labelling themselves as bisexual is an unsafe person for trans people. I think people use bi and pan interchangeably too much to assume anything without talking to the individual.
You’re twisting my words, I said whether or not someone is safe, not that they’re unsafe.
If you can’t confirm that at first look then your only option is better safe than sorry and move on or get into what can very quickly turn into an unpleasant conversation.
There is nuance and what you assume people do is just your own personal experience.
My own experience is I’ve met many a cool bisexual in the right forums. I’ve also seen plenty a bisexual who hate the term pansexual and thinks it’s redundant because they don’t acknowledge the nuance. That isn’t the kind of person I want to be around. Sure talking helps but when you’re a pretty hated minority it’s not exactly an attractive proposition to get to know every bisexual.
To relate this back dating apps, if you’re bisexual and down with trans people, let us know on your bio! And if you’re someone who is attracted to all just take the dive and go pansexual! It’s more specific and let’s others know exactly who your interested in.
To be pedantic… “Whether or not someone is safe” introduces two options: Safe or not safe. Unsafe and “not safe” are more interchangeable than pansexual and bisexual.
I understand it’s not what you meant… but I dont think they’re twisting your words. I think it’s an honest attempt at faithfully interpreting your words. It’s just that the language isn’t really built for the kind of distinction you’re trying to make.
I’d have to agree with you there, I apologize, it’s English specific but god does English have some issues like that. To clarify I meant you have no idea of their intentions, so you can’t tell if they have ill or well intentioned thoughts towards you, so for your own sake it’s easier to assume they are not safe. That doesn’t mean they are dangerous but you can’t know for certain.
There are plenty of straight people that have no problem dating trans people.
Painting bisexual and straight people as inherently transphobic is wild.
Pansexual people can be racist. Is it fair to say that people of color should be wary of pansexuals because that group might contain racists?
Except nowhere did I say either are inherently transphobic. I was pointing out that you’re more likely to run into a transphobic person of either of those groups because it’s such a wide encompassing umbrella.
To me it’s no different from saying you’re more likely to run into someone who is homophobic who is straight than someone who is homophobic and bisexual.
As for the racist thing I would say it’s a nonsense thing to say because it’s totally different. I’d say it’s fair that people of color should be wary of white people because because of systemic racism at large has stemmed from white supremacy. Are there people of color who are racist, absolutely, are people of color with internalized racism, absolutely. Should I be the one who should be talking about this, absolutely not nor am I comfortar with it but you brought us to race.
More than anything I’m sick of having to explain and re-explain that some communities and sexualities are more risky for trans people than others.
If they weren’t it wouldn’t be fucking normalized that trans people need to disclaim themselves being transgender with their partners for their own safety.
I’m refuting that bisexual people are inherently more risky to trans people by virtue of being bisexual.
Why does being bisexual have similar baggage as straight people that make them more transphobic than pansexual people?
How do you not see that you’re stereotyping groups of people based on their sexual orientation?
You sure abandoned straight people fast.
I also disagree for the fact that bisexuality is wide encompassing and normalized. It’s a term you don’t need to understand that there are more than two genders to use.
You see in this very thread plenty of misunderstandings as to the definition to the extent that one person said they thought it meant attraction to both men and women. That one seems to be the most popular I’ve seen which is an issue because of how cis normative it is.
The actual bisexual definition is inclusive and I’m not calling bisexuals evil. I’m saying because of that inclusivity it also includes more problematic people. Different communities have different definitions of bisexual and it just so happens liking both men and women perfectly fits the actual definition of bisexual just as much as say a more conservative and narrow viewed of it.
You don’t have to believe me but I’ve seen that community and I’ve been on the internet long enough to know not to assume just because we’re both queer that the other person is an ally.
Sort of an odd thing to say while also missing the nuance between the two and parroting biphobic points.
That’s not the difference.
Okay I see two comments from you right now saying this, explain the difference to me.
So, I’ll start by saying that it’s pretty on brand for this meme post lol, but there are multiple definitions of bisexuality and pansexuality I find acceptable. There are some that are bullshit. I don’t really subscribe to one true definition of it. I have one I use the most that I’ll talk about later in this post. This is what I take issue with, see emphasis.
This is either biphobic by assuming bisexuals are not accepting of trans people or transphobic by viewing trans men as a different gender than cis men (same for trans women and cis women). That’s why I have a problem with it. Bisexuality has never meant that.
Someone else in this thread has already mentioned the bisexual manifesto from 1990. Now, to be clear, this isn’t me saying “hey, it’s called the bisexual manifesto, it’s the one true definition of bisexuality.” (It itself even says its not.) But I find this part relevant when discussing multiple definitions.
So even in 1990 it was understood by bisexuals that bisexuals did not have a single “one true definition” of bisexuality. Not to even mention pansexuality and what shape the venn diagram of the two might make.
Me, personally, the definition I use, that I feel I see many people use and also I have some bias towards because I feel it’s the most satisfying is that pansexuals are attracted to traits of people without regards to gender. While bisexuals are attracted to any gender of people and may have traits they find attractive in some genders but not others. And the example I always give of this is, someone who is bi, but not pan, might find muscular women attractive, but dislike muscles on men. Meanwhile, someone who is pan would just like muscles regardless.
Another definition I use, but perhaps less useful to answer you, is that bisexuals are people who identify as bisexual. Pansexuals are people who identify as pansexual. And yes, people can identify as both or only one. I think self identification in the queer community is massively important. I have a friend who’s wife came out as nonbinary. He calls himself straight. So when people ask me what his sexuality is, I say he’s straight. Is there a part of me that believes in some technical, theoretical sense that he should consider labeling himself as something else? Sure, yeah, because his wife is nonbinary now, but that’s not really my business unless he asked me about it.
First off thanks for writing up such a detailed answer while touching on the history of bisexuality.
Believe me that is not what meant to say but I have be paying from the nose for wording it like that. It more has to do with how bisexuality is defined differently for different people and how that relates to right leaning groups where bisexuals can pass.
It’s totally useful, a bit frustrating in a way that makes it feel like there’s an itch I can’t scratch but I agree and also think it’s something to be left alone. Let sleeping dogs lie and frankly questioning people on their identity is more likely to cause more problems and strain the relationship more than it will solve.
I actually think it’s fine to question people on their identity, the only person who can really tell you why they identify as what they identify is them. There’s some nuance of course, and you don’t want to pry or seem like you’re trying to convince them they’ve used the wrong label, but I think it’s fine to ask folks.
I’ll try to give a good example. The context of this thread is all of us discussing the difference. It’s a bit different than asking a singular person why they may have chose one over the other. A very close person to me chooses the pan label over the bi label because of a reason I personally disagree with and view as biphobic. They choose it because they don’t want trans and nonbinary people who subscribe to the biphobic definition to believe they’re transphobic or enbyphobic. My response to this is not “that’s biphobic, you shouldn’t do that.” Because the only real conclusion from that would be that I’m saying “You should call yourself bisexual” which would be relabeling them. Now, this specific conversation, it vent on, and all of us having the conversation are on the same page about it all, for the most part. We all agree there is massive, massive overlap between the two and the label doesn’t really matter too too much, and all of us would be fine saying we’re “bi/pan” probably. If our opinions were more unaligned on the topic, it may have gone differently. Especially if this person said that I am transphobic or enbyphobic for saying I am bisexual, but that’s not something they did and it’s not something they believe. Also, we did all say that the flag we preferred played a bit of a role lmao. The two of us that are bi love the bi color and the the one who is pan loves the pan colors.
I guess for me, going back to the dating app analogy, I’d rather label myself what I am (bisexual) and have people who have biphobic takes that assume I am transphobic/enbyphobic pass on me than relabel myself to accommodate them. Because I don’t think we’d necessarily be able to get along anyways. I think if someone is that opposed to the label found out I called myself pan instead of bi on my profile just to get into their DMs, it would also just push them further into biphobia and they’d unmatch with me anyways.
I think this is why this meme is so hilarious, bi versus pan just sort of carries on and on and rarely leads to satisfying conclusions. But I think there’s beauty there, I think the queer experience is so unique and I love to learn about people and also have others learn about me. I love discussions.
I see what you mean.
It’s the asserting that bisexuals are more transphobic than pansexuals that people have a problem with.
I didn’t say that was the difference though? I specifically stated that bisexuals are attracted to more than one gender and pansexuals are attracted to all. All pansexuals are bisexuals not all bisexuals are pan.
You did.
So are you disagreeing that a bisexual person could exclude trans people?
So could individual pansexual people. No I’m not denying that. I’m denying that bisexual people are inherently more transphobic as a group.