Omnisexual - You’ve spent way more time thinking about your sexuality than getting laid
Demisexual - You’re way more queer than you’re ready to admit.
Sapiosexual - You’re a straight guy trying to impress the cute barista by seeming cool and intellectual. You are failing. Or you are a woman on a dating app trying to stop the endless flood of low-effort “sup” introductions. You are also failing.
Edit: Forgot one!
Heteroflexible - Willing to touch someone of the same gender sorta sexually for an audience if you think it means you’ll get a threesome later.
Honestly I think you're giving them too much credit to say they're doing it to avoid messages. It's the same weird virtue signalling in both cases. "Not like the other girls," etc.
It's inventing a sexuality because you think it makes you sounds smart. Ooohh physical attraction is for losers, I'm only attracted to BRAINS. I can't help but think these people would still shy away from an ugly genius
I'm pansexual, solidly a millennial, and started using the term nearly a decade and a half ago. Which was late to the game, since the term had been around for about a decade before that.
Under what does someone fall, who regularly forgets that sex exists, immune to flirting, needs external reminders/influence and effort to get in to the mood, cant wrap their head around attraction at all and completely hates the hand their dealt with?
Hey now! I may be autistic but I assure you I don’t ever forget sex exists and im horny like 90~95% of the time, but I am completely oblivious to flirting or interesting shown so that doesn’t get mitigated as much as I’d like
Probably because the identities we circle back to often have merit even if we don't like it (the number of years I kept finding stupid arguments that I wasn't trans…)
It sounds like you dislike this about yourself. You could check to see if there's a medical issue causing extremely low libido. But fair warning, it may just result in you being horny and not finding anyone attractive.
Yes i kinda dislike it as it is a source of problems and just accepting it wouldn't really solve any issues.
Sadly I've been trying to fix it for years, problems probably started or at least become noticable over a decade ago. By now i have already exhausted approved medical and physical means in trying to fix it, even started replacement therapy eventually as test levels were on the low end even despite doing as much as possible to boost those.
While it has had rather good outcome on overall physical and mental health, it hasn't had any effect on libido.
Haven't yet delved into balck market or anabolic steroids territory, yet and of course therapy is still left, but that's rather expensive and social stigma is kinda strong on that subject. Especially for a guy who seemingly shouldn't have any issues regarding it.
But there is, it causes problems and puts unproportionaly much pressure on the other side. Aka the other side needs to do the initiating 99% of the times, which creates the feeling of not being wanted.
Coupled with the constant rejection as well isn't that good on self esteem either.
Like in relationships posts which get more popular, there are always guys who complain how they're tired from constantly initiating and don't feel wanted, which leads to them just giving up all together.
Let me put it this way: Do you hate a gay man for not wanting to fuck women? Asexuality is a valid part of the spectrum. If you have no interest, then you have no interest. But it doesn't mean you can't have an intimate relationship or love. Plenty do it. The key is communication - if your partner thinks you have sexual feelings but are rejecting them then it's a very different beast to "I don't have sexual feelings for anyone"
there are always guys who complain how they’re tired from constantly initiating and don’t feel wanted
If you're talking the broader complaints of society here, that's a very different kettle of fish, and a lot of it is tied into not doing the work before just going "snog me, woman!"
I apologize in advance if it gets too depressive or over sharing. I've noticed over the years that just writing things down can be kinda helpful in at least articulating and getting a better understanding of my own mental processes.
Fair, yeah i wouldn't hate another individual over something that simple aka gay man not wanting to fuck woman. It's rather easy to accept other individuals than oneself.
It's so much more easier to hate oneself and beat oneself up, even if it's completely irrational. It's something that can be done, even if detrimental, but it gives at least some form of an illusion over having control over it.
Like not remembering to initiate more or being too tired and not pushing through it or forgetting actions that make the partner feel wanted or the equipment being already fully primed and ready to go, but the mind not being there. If i fail those, it's my fault. I have to do better and try harder. Maybe if i keep searching for long enough i will eventually find a cure or a fix.
Accepting asexuality seems like giving up without a fight, like surrendering.
While love and intimacy might be rather complicated concepts for me, as I've understood yes those are possible without sex, but once again from a practical perspective overwhelming majority of people do see sex as the main distinction between friendship and a relationship. So the lack of drive or desire is going to be a rather huge disadvantage.
Yes i know and been told that I'm not supposed to "date" half the population, so the disadvantage shouldnt matter, but i never did manage to figure out what's supposed to be the driving force beyond practicality then.
On the broader complaints part. Fair, probably a bad example as i tried to show the effect of not feeling wanted and the burden of being the one who disproportionately has to initiate, while taking it from a too biased perspective and not properly knowing the background details, though it still does hit rather close to home being at the opposite end of it.
I may have gotten my terms mixed up, but I think demi is reactive sexuality, someone who gets turned on by their partner getting turned on. Requires a bond / connection. Not really interested without it.
I’m not super familiar with terms on that ace spectrum though. It’s somewhere on there.
Fair, reactively getting turned on kinda fits under outside influence part. Though cant tell anything about the bond/connection aspect, as thats way too vague and complicated for me.
I'm old and refused to claim a flag when they were presented.
I just tell people that "I'm independent, but occupied" or I ask them why they are so concerned about my penis, depending on the manner in which the question was asked.
Sorry, I don't actually know any, but I guessed the kitchen jokes about pansexual are related to the "pan" part. I then though it feasible there were shopping jokes about bisexuals because of the "bi" (homophone for buy) part.
Ahhh, so pansexual means that you like half man, half goat people who play the flute? Or is it that you get an erection at the thought of buying new kitchen ware?
Actually it originally refers to having two sexes. Aka hermaphroditic.
I really hate how the word “sexual” has evolved in meaning into “relating to the activity that evolved to happen between the two main sexes”. We have the perfectly good Greek root “ero” and for some reason we have gradually muddled up the meaning of “sexual”.
It could also be applied to animals meaning something that nowadays would be described as “intersex”.
I just think this meaning makes much more sense than “being attracted to two (later multiple) sexes”. If about sexuality and not sex, “bisexual” should just mean “with sexuality related to the number two” based on the etymology.
I think what you're stuck on is the scientific use of a word and a social use of a word can have different meanings. And depending on context the scientific use can differ.
In the case of bisexual, the term was likely used because the preference was for both genitals, since only 2 genders existed to science at that point. Also the term was coined by psychologists in 1890.
Well the modern usage of “bisexual” regarding sexual orientation has also found its way into science, evidenced by the lack of prominent scientific synonyms
Which again is irritating because scientific terminology shouldn’t be this lax
I think “bisexual” only references two sexes because it was created to describe a phenomenon related to sexual reproduction which evolved to occur between two main sexes; the term was unrelated to gender
As someone who identifies as pansexual, the distinction i make is that I don't consider gender when vetting a potential partner, it's just not a metric that is part of that decision.
Aside from that, your description here is spot on from what I understand at least. Of course gender and sexuality is a social construct so other people may feel differently
In my friend group, the bisexuals are very “gender is irrelevant.”
While the “attracted to one specific gender and others” ppl tend me more … “straight, but I’ll suck a dick” (or the inverse “gay, but boobs are super hot”)
That's super interesting and totally does not at all reflect the conversations I've had with my friends!
I guess it just goes to show how subjective it is, which is why there is no real consensus. I can only really speak for myself and the people in my circles. I won't argue with bisexual/pansexual people who identify differently because we dictate our own identities really.
I switch between them, but I concur, I also prefer the bi flag and I usually just identify as bi for simplicity and not having to explain the difference lol
Edit: I'm not here to comment on the bi/pan debate, and do not intend for my comment to extend to that debate. But the definition of "bilingual" (the subject of the question I'm answering) seems to be extremely clear on its specificity. From Merriam-Webster:
1: having or expressed in two languages
a bilingual document
an officially bilingual nation
2: using or able to use two languages especially with equal fluency
Sure. But if you want to dig that hard into the meaning of the suffix "bi" when used in queer spaces, you're gonna wear yourself out.
I identify pan because I don't care what's between your legs, I like you and want to touch it. But I'm not going to I'm acktually someone for feeling the exact same way but identify bi.
My wife generally says that she's bi, but if she were coming out today she's said that she'd probably call herself pan, that just wasn't really a common term when back when she did come out so she's spent most of her life calling herself bi, and she just kind of identifies with that label more at this point.
To her, the term bi does kind of imply that someone is attracted only to males or females and would tend to exclude non-binary gender identities (though not necessarily trans people, being MtF or FtM does still kind of line up with a traditional gender binary, a trans man is a man and a trans woman is a woman)
Which doesn't really describe her, she'd be cool with any identity, which to her is more pan, but again she's just been calling herself bi for so long it just feels weird to change that, and since she's off the market at this point it's a little bit of a moot point anyway since she's not trying to get in anyone's pants but mine.
I feel like placing identities into hierarchies always ends up controversial. Like non-binary is technically under transgender because transgender just means your transitioning from your assigned gender to something else; but a lot of non-binary people really don't like being called transgender instead of non-binary.
At the end of the day, the words meanings are a subjective experience that cannot be directly observed or compared. So functionally all self-identifying terms exist flat relative to each other because there will always be contradictory definitions that you can't rigidly settle on without ignoring significant groups of people.
Head canon is where you make shit up for internal entertainment. This being on lemmy, I kinda assumed that even in a science meme community, head canon would be understood. Sorry about that ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I'm dubious if pansexual being invented by people that didn't understand that though. The word pansexual is usually acknowledged as being derived from pansexualism, which was coined whole by or about Freud (supposedly, I wasn't alive then to know) to mean that sex and sexuality are a primary motivation in all human existence.
The later term came around back in the seventies, and was being used to mean having no limits on sexuality. I've run across people saying they used it as far back as the sixties in that context, but they were dirty hippie potheads, sooo...
In any case, it was in use during at least the late seventies, as it showed up in print in some of the books of the era that were part of the sexual revolution. And it didn't "just" mean trans inclusive, nor was it used as a direct synonym for bisexual. It very much included things like what gets called polyamory now, group activity, etc. The core usage was that the person calling themselves pansexual was not limiting themselves to the standard paradigm, which is a different thing from being attracted to and/or having hetero and/or homo sexual activity.
I'm not sure exactly when the term got shifted to the increasingly common usage of "trans inclusive sexual orientation", though I remember running into it as far back as either the late nineties or early oughts.
So, I'm fairly confident that the people back in the sixties or seventies that originated it as something close to an orientation knew that bisexuality existed, and saw pansexual as being something that went beyond it in some way. I've definitely never run across any definitive "first use" where the term was defined in print. Not saying it wasn't, just that none of my reading of the matter back in the day uncovered it, and human sexuality was very present in my mom's collection of books. Our town library even included books on the subject, though less than what my mom had, and way less than I had access to later on.
With that in mind, if you have run across something definitive regarding the origin of the term either in the seventies sense, or its adoption as trans inclusive, I would absolutely love it if you could guide me to it. Not being snarky, not being contrarian, I'd genuinely enjoy learning more about it because it's a subject that's fascinated me since I was old enough to think about sex at all.
This is really interesting and a great contribution to this discussion. I wish whoever was downvoting you would comment to say what they take issue with.
I don't really know how guy unicorns are targeted? Are they? I've only heard of the term unicorn being applied to women. But, I'm adjacent to the space at best.
Has cucking, becoming more fashionable, increased couples targeting bulls the same way unicorns are? As in toxically.
I suppose it's different, a unicorn is expected to attended to both partners equally. Whereas, a bull isn't really.
This is both off topic, and a Wendy's. I don't expect an answer.
The fact that is sarcasm doesn't change the fact that your comment suggests that threesomes are the thing you talk about when talking about bi/pan people.
Expressly and unequivocally, threesomes are not something I particularly talk about when talking to bi/pan people.
Certainly not any more than anyone else. It isn't something I voluntarily suggest we do, it's not something I expressly ask about. Some of my friends have had threesomes, and some of those are bi/pan. So it's not something I've not talked about, it's just not the first thing that comes to mind.
Do you have a resource to confirm what you're saying? Because homosexual means same sex and heterosexual is opposite sex. Bisexual would be both sexes by that reasoning
It was recently pointed out to me that an outfit I have been rocking for years makes it look like I’m trying to be a walking bisexual flag: pink button up over a purple tank top with blue shorts. This was by coincidence do but I love those colors so I was fully prepared to die on the hill that it was the superior flag.
But after refreshing my memory, you right the pan flag looks like three flavors of ice cream stacked atop each other
Honestly to me the difference is mostly cultural or vibes, and I just identify with bi vibes more. I feel like the flags encapsulate this difference well
bisexual flowers do exists and theres variations of this too. and then theres mononecious, and unisexual plants. plants are all kinds of "sexuality." depending on the species.(apomixis, vegative growth, root cloning.) plants have all the "sexuals" that animals can dream of.
I'm bisexual so I really only feel qualified to assert that definition.
I believe that pansexuals are attracted despite gender. I dunno, I can't tell the difference between the two. I'm just old and bisexual feels like it fits better for me.
This is so weird for me. I thought my app was broken (and I'm thinking it is in a niche way) because suddenly almost no posts were loading. It turns out you just spammed a ton of posts, and they specifically won't load for me, but all other posts are fine. Weird.
Nah, that's the annoying myth that bi people hate. My partner is trans, and transitioned during our relationship, and I always joke that as a lazy bisexual this is perfect for me.
Really it's just old people (millenials) call it bi, and you young whipper-snappers with your eight track tapes get all pedantic about the sound of the word.
Yeah, generational, it grew branches. The phonetics of "bi" matter and the language is evolving. But we totally get the Bi doesn't mean two genders for that generation of queers that reached for that word.
ahh see now you have retreated to "original" meaning. So by that metric, everyone who's heart is light (ie "gay") is attracted to everyone who is their gender.
Yeah as a trans woman I've never seen someone identify as bi and thought "I shouldn't hit on her" because of that label. And if I also found men attractive I'd almost certainly use that label.
179 Comments
BartyDeCanter@piefed.social · 117 pts · 58d
Bisexual - You’re over 35
Pansexual - You’re under 35
Omnisexual - You’ve spent way more time thinking about your sexuality than getting laid
Demisexual - You’re way more queer than you’re ready to admit.
Sapiosexual - You’re a straight guy trying to impress the cute barista by seeming cool and intellectual. You are failing. Or you are a woman on a dating app trying to stop the endless flood of low-effort “sup” introductions. You are also failing.
Edit: Forgot one!
Heteroflexible - Willing to touch someone of the same gender sorta sexually for an audience if you think it means you’ll get a threesome later.
ChicoSuave@lemmy.world · 38 pts · 58d
Flexisexual - you'll take what you can get
ivanafterall@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 58d
Mexisexual if you like it spicy, corny, and fulfilling.
bitjunkie@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 58d
Also known as bi-greedy
derfunkatron@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 56d
Are they a regex?
.*sexualkryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world · 21 pts · 58d
I've been Demisexual since I first watched Striptease as a teenager.
glimse@lemmy.world · 19 pts · 58d
Huh, I've only ever heard women describe themselves as sapiosexual
BartyDeCanter@piefed.social · 7 pts · 58d
Updated!
glimse@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 58d
Honestly I think you're giving them too much credit to say they're doing it to avoid messages. It's the same weird virtue signalling in both cases. "Not like the other girls," etc.
It's inventing a sexuality because you think it makes you sounds smart. Ooohh physical attraction is for losers, I'm only attracted to BRAINS. I can't help but think these people would still shy away from an ugly genius
jerkface@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 51d
Ditto.
Taleya@aussie.zone · 1 pts · 57d
Oof if they did it to you, it was a drive by
SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de · 15 pts · 58d
I like to call it "millenial" vs "gen z" pan/bisexuality
Mesophar@pawb.social · 16 pts · 58d
I'm pansexual, solidly a millennial, and started using the term nearly a decade and a half ago. Which was late to the game, since the term had been around for about a decade before that.
SGforce@lemmy.ca · 7 pts · 58d
Swear I heard it late nineties
Taleya@aussie.zone · 3 pts · 57d
Nah, mills are all about the pan, genx are the bis
Rooskie91@discuss.online · 13 pts · 57d
I thought pansexual was where you had the legs of a goat, played a little reed flute, and got off on being generally mischievous.
Shellofbiomatter@lemmus.org · 10 pts · 58d
Under what does someone fall, who regularly forgets that sex exists, immune to flirting, needs external reminders/influence and effort to get in to the mood, cant wrap their head around attraction at all and completely hates the hand their dealt with?
bitjunkie@lemmy.world · 25 pts · 58d
Autistic.
cmbabul@slrpnk.net · 4 pts · 57d
Hey now! I may be autistic but I assure you I don’t ever forget sex exists and im horny like 90~95% of the time, but I am completely oblivious to flirting or interesting shown so that doesn’t get mitigated as much as I’d like
Shellofbiomatter@lemmus.org · 3 pts · 58d
Well yeah, little bit of that too. That's what probably makes it more confusing.
Zron@lemmy.world · 20 pts · 58d
That would be asexual
anzo@programming.dev · 7 pts · 58d
Ace, or graysexual
Shellofbiomatter@lemmus.org · 3 pts · 58d
Damnit, why i always circle back to that one.
captainlezbian@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 58d
Probably because the identities we circle back to often have merit even if we don't like it (the number of years I kept finding stupid arguments that I wasn't trans…)
It sounds like you dislike this about yourself. You could check to see if there's a medical issue causing extremely low libido. But fair warning, it may just result in you being horny and not finding anyone attractive.
Shellofbiomatter@lemmus.org · 1 pts · 58d
Yes i kinda dislike it as it is a source of problems and just accepting it wouldn't really solve any issues.
Sadly I've been trying to fix it for years, problems probably started or at least become noticable over a decade ago. By now i have already exhausted approved medical and physical means in trying to fix it, even started replacement therapy eventually as test levels were on the low end even despite doing as much as possible to boost those.
While it has had rather good outcome on overall physical and mental health, it hasn't had any effect on libido.
Haven't yet delved into balck market or anabolic steroids territory, yet and of course therapy is still left, but that's rather expensive and social stigma is kinda strong on that subject. Especially for a guy who seemingly shouldn't have any issues regarding it.
Taleya@aussie.zone · 2 pts · 57d
Aro/ace.
You need to work on detangling intimacy and sex in your brain, there's no reason to hate lack of drive.
Shellofbiomatter@lemmus.org · 1 pts · 57d
But there is, it causes problems and puts unproportionaly much pressure on the other side. Aka the other side needs to do the initiating 99% of the times, which creates the feeling of not being wanted. Coupled with the constant rejection as well isn't that good on self esteem either.
Like in relationships posts which get more popular, there are always guys who complain how they're tired from constantly initiating and don't feel wanted, which leads to them just giving up all together.
Taleya@aussie.zone · 2 pts · 57d
no, there is no reason to hate lack of drive.
Let me put it this way: Do you hate a gay man for not wanting to fuck women? Asexuality is a valid part of the spectrum. If you have no interest, then you have no interest. But it doesn't mean you can't have an intimate relationship or love. Plenty do it. The key is communication - if your partner thinks you have sexual feelings but are rejecting them then it's a very different beast to "I don't have sexual feelings for anyone"
If you're talking the broader complaints of society here, that's a very different kettle of fish, and a lot of it is tied into not doing the work before just going "snog me, woman!"
Shellofbiomatter@lemmus.org · 1 pts · 57d
I apologize in advance if it gets too depressive or over sharing. I've noticed over the years that just writing things down can be kinda helpful in at least articulating and getting a better understanding of my own mental processes.
Fair, yeah i wouldn't hate another individual over something that simple aka gay man not wanting to fuck woman. It's rather easy to accept other individuals than oneself. It's so much more easier to hate oneself and beat oneself up, even if it's completely irrational. It's something that can be done, even if detrimental, but it gives at least some form of an illusion over having control over it.
Like not remembering to initiate more or being too tired and not pushing through it or forgetting actions that make the partner feel wanted or the equipment being already fully primed and ready to go, but the mind not being there. If i fail those, it's my fault. I have to do better and try harder. Maybe if i keep searching for long enough i will eventually find a cure or a fix.
Accepting asexuality seems like giving up without a fight, like surrendering.
While love and intimacy might be rather complicated concepts for me, as I've understood yes those are possible without sex, but once again from a practical perspective overwhelming majority of people do see sex as the main distinction between friendship and a relationship. So the lack of drive or desire is going to be a rather huge disadvantage.
Yes i know and been told that I'm not supposed to "date" half the population, so the disadvantage shouldnt matter, but i never did manage to figure out what's supposed to be the driving force beyond practicality then.
On the broader complaints part. Fair, probably a bad example as i tried to show the effect of not feeling wanted and the burden of being the one who disproportionately has to initiate, while taking it from a too biased perspective and not properly knowing the background details, though it still does hit rather close to home being at the opposite end of it.
atomicorange@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 58d
Pretty sure that’s demi.
Shellofbiomatter@lemmus.org · 2 pts · 58d
Others are saying grey or ace. Why demi then?
atomicorange@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 58d
I may have gotten my terms mixed up, but I think demi is reactive sexuality, someone who gets turned on by their partner getting turned on. Requires a bond / connection. Not really interested without it.
I’m not super familiar with terms on that ace spectrum though. It’s somewhere on there.
Shellofbiomatter@lemmus.org · 2 pts · 58d
Fair, reactively getting turned on kinda fits under outside influence part. Though cant tell anything about the bond/connection aspect, as thats way too vague and complicated for me.
GripenGal@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 57d
It's not reactive, it means that attraction is conditional on an emotional bond existing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demisexuality
Muffi@programming.dev · 7 pts · 58d
That is the best description of sapiosexual I have ever heard
CascadianGiraffe@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 56d
I'm old and refused to claim a flag when they were presented.
I just tell people that "I'm independent, but occupied" or I ask them why they are so concerned about my penis, depending on the manner in which the question was asked.
plutopos@lemmy.zip · 61 pts · 58d
A bisexual is a pansexual who's had enough of kitchen jokes
bingrazer@lemmy.world · 21 pts · 58d
Would a pansexual be a bisexual who's had enough shopping jokes?
Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 14 pts · 58d
No. But of Bicycles.
manuremy@sopuli.xyz · 12 pts · 58d
Wait, I'm sorry but I have never heard a bisexual shopping joke. Would you please educate me?
bingrazer@lemmy.world · 21 pts · 58d
Sorry, I don't actually know any, but I guessed the kitchen jokes about pansexual are related to the "pan" part. I then though it feasible there were shopping jokes about bisexuals because of the "bi" (homophone for buy) part.
manuremy@sopuli.xyz · 16 pts · 58d
Ah okay! I'm more into the utensils.
Planchette_Phantom@lemmy.zip · 60 pts · 58d
MajorMajormajormajor@lemmy.ca · 38 pts · 58d
Doesn't the name imply only two?
FilthyShrooms@lemmy.world · 67 pts · 58d
No it implies once every other week
Wait
synae@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 19 pts · 58d
Well then what's semisexual?? I'll never get this figured out
meekah@discuss.tchncs.de · 21 pts · 58d
that means you like large trucks for hauling commercial goods
Test_Tickles@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 58d
Ahhh, so pansexual means that you like half man, half goat people who play the flute? Or is it that you get an erection at the thought of buying new kitchen ware?
logi@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 58d
I've got a hot little Le Crouset simmering in the kitchen 🤤
Semjeza@fedinsfw.app · 2 pts · 58d
The former, I guess, if this clip rubs you the right way.
Does this work?
YouTube
Test_Tickles@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 58d
Link didn't work for me.
BCsven@lemmy.ca · 11 pts · 58d
Or twice a week?
MajorMajormajormajor@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 58d
Shit, that's the rough life. I'll take the twice a week definition instead please, Trebek.
bitjunkie@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 58d
That'd be semi-weekly.
laurelraven@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 58d
You mean semi-sexual?
bitjunkie@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 58d
Too real.
Semjeza@fedinsfw.app · 61 pts · 58d
The "bi" is for both homosexual and heterosexual relations. Not gender itself.
spinne@sh.itjust.works · 8 pts · 58d
TIL
Okokimup@lemmy.world · 49 pts · 58d
Sure but it can be interpreted as "people who share my gender" and "people who do not share my gender."
percent@infosec.pub · 19 pts · 58d
This is off-topic, but... For some reason, that reminded me of a funny exchange I had with someone who was buying a lottery ticket, years ago...
Me: "What are the chances that you'll win?"
Him, with a heavy southern (US) accent: "50/50. You either win or you don't."
Planchette_Phantom@lemmy.zip · 11 pts · 58d
blargh513@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 58d
Ok but did we really need yet another term that is difficult to distinguish from pre-existing terms?
When you have to write an essay to describe it, that should be a clue.
Planchette_Phantom@lemmy.zip · 18 pts · 58d
Carnelian@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 58d
A clue to what? That some concepts take more than one second to explain?
bellsfry@thelemmy.club · -15 pts · 58d
Actually it originally refers to having two sexes. Aka hermaphroditic.
I really hate how the word “sexual” has evolved in meaning into “relating to the activity that evolved to happen between the two main sexes”. We have the perfectly good Greek root “ero” and for some reason we have gradually muddled up the meaning of “sexual”.
village604@adultswim.fan · 6 pts · 58d
In plants*
bellsfry@thelemmy.club · -3 pts · 58d
It could also be applied to animals meaning something that nowadays would be described as “intersex”.
I just think this meaning makes much more sense than “being attracted to two (later multiple) sexes”. If about sexuality and not sex, “bisexual” should just mean “with sexuality related to the number two” based on the etymology.
village604@adultswim.fan · 2 pts · 58d
I think what you're stuck on is the scientific use of a word and a social use of a word can have different meanings. And depending on context the scientific use can differ.
In the case of bisexual, the term was likely used because the preference was for both genitals, since only 2 genders existed to science at that point. Also the term was coined by psychologists in 1890.
bellsfry@thelemmy.club · 1 pts · 57d
Well the modern usage of “bisexual” regarding sexual orientation has also found its way into science, evidenced by the lack of prominent scientific synonyms
Which again is irritating because scientific terminology shouldn’t be this lax
I think “bisexual” only references two sexes because it was created to describe a phenomenon related to sexual reproduction which evolved to occur between two main sexes; the term was unrelated to gender
anotherspinelessdem@lemmy.ml · 9 pts · 58d
It does, but definitions often diverge from the original over time
purplerabbit@piefed.blahaj.zone · 2 pts · 54d
A master, and an apprentice.
MajorMajormajormajor@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 54d
Bisithual
jerkface@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 51d
ayyy@sh.itjust.works · 14 pts · 58d
But is there a rule that says a dog can’t play basketball?
akwd169@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 58d
No
We are a go for airbud 12
.
.
.
.
RIP Buddy we all love you
Banana@sh.itjust.works · 14 pts · 58d
As someone who identifies as pansexual, the distinction i make is that I don't consider gender when vetting a potential partner, it's just not a metric that is part of that decision.
Aside from that, your description here is spot on from what I understand at least. Of course gender and sexuality is a social construct so other people may feel differently
groet@feddit.org · 9 pts · 58d
bisexual = attracted to all genders
pansexual = no gender they are not attracted to
Banana@sh.itjust.works · 7 pts · 58d
Kinda!
The way I'd personally word it is:
Bisexual = attracted to their own gender and other genders (perhaps not every gender but that depends on the person)
Pansexual = gender is irrelevant
The distinction is mostly semantic as it doesn't really change much in terms of how we operate in dating.
demonquark@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 57d
Counter-anecdote
In my friend group, the bisexuals are very “gender is irrelevant.”
While the “attracted to one specific gender and others” ppl tend me more … “straight, but I’ll suck a dick” (or the inverse “gay, but boobs are super hot”)
Banana@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 57d
That's super interesting and totally does not at all reflect the conversations I've had with my friends!
I guess it just goes to show how subjective it is, which is why there is no real consensus. I can only really speak for myself and the people in my circles. I won't argue with bisexual/pansexual people who identify differently because we dictate our own identities really.
Lileath@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 3 pts · 57d
The only reason I identify as bi instead of pan is because I like the bi flag more
Banana@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 57d
I switch between them, but I concur, I also prefer the bi flag and I usually just identify as bi for simplicity and not having to explain the difference lol
Lodespawn@aussie.zone · 6 pts · 58d
Err shouldn't it be the other way around? Ie bisexuality under the umbrella of pan-?
Planchette_Phantom@lemmy.zip · 22 pts · 58d
Lodespawn@aussie.zone · 1 pts · 58d
Fair enough
Honytawk@discuss.tchncs.de · 4 pts · 58d
Bi-sexual. So attracted to both sexes. Not genders.
ILikeTraaaains@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 58d
Homo> Same Hetero > Different Bi > Attracted to both same and different
PhoenixDog@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 58d
So you're not bilingual if you know multiple languages?
fireweed@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 57d
Nope, that's multilingual or polyglot.
Edit: I'm not here to comment on the bi/pan debate, and do not intend for my comment to extend to that debate. But the definition of "bilingual" (the subject of the question I'm answering) seems to be extremely clear on its specificity. From Merriam-Webster:
1: having or expressed in two languages
a bilingual document
an officially bilingual nation
2: using or able to use two languages especially with equal fluency
bilingual in English and Japanese
3: of or relating to bilingual education
PhoenixDog@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 57d
Sure. But if you want to dig that hard into the meaning of the suffix "bi" when used in queer spaces, you're gonna wear yourself out.
I identify pan because I don't care what's between your legs, I like you and want to touch it. But I'm not going to I'm acktually someone for feeling the exact same way but identify bi.
fireweed@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 57d
Please see my edit.
PhoenixDog@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 57d
Please read my comment.
Taleya@aussie.zone · 2 pts · 57d
Nope. Bi means own gender and others.
Fondots@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 58d
My wife generally says that she's bi, but if she were coming out today she's said that she'd probably call herself pan, that just wasn't really a common term when back when she did come out so she's spent most of her life calling herself bi, and she just kind of identifies with that label more at this point.
To her, the term bi does kind of imply that someone is attracted only to males or females and would tend to exclude non-binary gender identities (though not necessarily trans people, being MtF or FtM does still kind of line up with a traditional gender binary, a trans man is a man and a trans woman is a woman)
Which doesn't really describe her, she'd be cool with any identity, which to her is more pan, but again she's just been calling herself bi for so long it just feels weird to change that, and since she's off the market at this point it's a little bit of a moot point anyway since she's not trying to get in anyone's pants but mine.
Wirlocke@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 2 pts · 57d
I feel like placing identities into hierarchies always ends up controversial. Like non-binary is technically under transgender because transgender just means your transitioning from your assigned gender to something else; but a lot of non-binary people really don't like being called transgender instead of non-binary.
At the end of the day, the words meanings are a subjective experience that cannot be directly observed or compared. So functionally all self-identifying terms exist flat relative to each other because there will always be contradictory definitions that you can't rigidly settle on without ignoring significant groups of people.
RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 56d
....bi means 2.
southsamurai@sh.itjust.works · -5 pts · 58d
I tend to head canon it as binarysexual and pansexual, just as a way to keep them straight (heh) when running through things in thought
Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works · 13 pts · 58d
That's incorrect though. Bisexual means "homo- and heterosexual" as in, "those that share your gender and those that don't".
Which is the same as pansexual. But pansexual is a term invented by people who didn't understand the above.
southsamurai@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 58d
That's why I said head canon.
Head canon is where you make shit up for internal entertainment. This being on lemmy, I kinda assumed that even in a science meme community, head canon would be understood. Sorry about that ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I'm dubious if pansexual being invented by people that didn't understand that though. The word pansexual is usually acknowledged as being derived from pansexualism, which was coined whole by or about Freud (supposedly, I wasn't alive then to know) to mean that sex and sexuality are a primary motivation in all human existence.
The later term came around back in the seventies, and was being used to mean having no limits on sexuality. I've run across people saying they used it as far back as the sixties in that context, but they were dirty hippie potheads, sooo...
In any case, it was in use during at least the late seventies, as it showed up in print in some of the books of the era that were part of the sexual revolution. And it didn't "just" mean trans inclusive, nor was it used as a direct synonym for bisexual. It very much included things like what gets called polyamory now, group activity, etc. The core usage was that the person calling themselves pansexual was not limiting themselves to the standard paradigm, which is a different thing from being attracted to and/or having hetero and/or homo sexual activity.
I'm not sure exactly when the term got shifted to the increasingly common usage of "trans inclusive sexual orientation", though I remember running into it as far back as either the late nineties or early oughts.
So, I'm fairly confident that the people back in the sixties or seventies that originated it as something close to an orientation knew that bisexuality existed, and saw pansexual as being something that went beyond it in some way. I've definitely never run across any definitive "first use" where the term was defined in print. Not saying it wasn't, just that none of my reading of the matter back in the day uncovered it, and human sexuality was very present in my mom's collection of books. Our town library even included books on the subject, though less than what my mom had, and way less than I had access to later on.
With that in mind, if you have run across something definitive regarding the origin of the term either in the seventies sense, or its adoption as trans inclusive, I would absolutely love it if you could guide me to it. Not being snarky, not being contrarian, I'd genuinely enjoy learning more about it because it's a subject that's fascinated me since I was old enough to think about sex at all.
Okokimup@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 58d
This is really interesting and a great contribution to this discussion. I wish whoever was downvoting you would comment to say what they take issue with.
thenextguy@lemmy.world · 51 pts · 58d
Being a lover of cast iron cookware, I identify as pansexual.
Okokimup@lemmy.world · 16 pts · 58d
Ooh saucy
ftbd@feddit.org · 6 pts · 58d
Hopefully nothing acidic like tomato sauce though, doesn't mix well with cast iron
Phantaloons@piefed.zip · 5 pts · 58d
turn over
"no, my fond is still browning"
jdr@lemmy.ml · 5 pts · 58d
Pan-sub identified
I dominate all my dishwasher contents
QualifiedKitten@discuss.online · 43 pts · 58d
I just like the bisexual flag colors better.
recklessengagement@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 58d
Same. That's literally the only reason I say bi and not pan
Kolanaki@pawb.social · 7 pts · 58d
I am the opposite and prefer the magenta, light blue and yellow to the magenta and dark blue.
Iron_Lynx@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 58d
Kinda same, and I'm not even bi/pan.
southsamurai@sh.itjust.works · 29 pts · 58d
Wait, wait, wait, pansexual is when you have a love for wide screen photography, right?
abrake@lemmy.world · 22 pts · 58d
Stupid sexy panorama
littlewonder@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 58d
So then graysexual means Ansel Adams?
Fedegenerate@fedinsfw.app · 29 pts · 58d
I learned long ago whether someone told me they were pan or bi, it took absolutely zero effort on my part to accept and agree with them.
Sure you're bi/pan, but are you a unicorn, because my fiancée and I really like your vibe.
PhoenixDog@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 58d
As a pan/poly guy... Sup?
Fedegenerate@fedinsfw.app · 2 pts · 58d
I don't really know how guy unicorns are targeted? Are they? I've only heard of the term unicorn being applied to women. But, I'm adjacent to the space at best.
Has cucking, becoming more fashionable, increased couples targeting bulls the same way unicorns are? As in toxically.
I suppose it's different, a unicorn is expected to attended to both partners equally. Whereas, a bull isn't really.
This is both off topic, and a Wendy's. I don't expect an answer.
PhoenixDog@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 58d
I can be whatever you need me to be ;)
teolan@lemmy.world · -6 pts · 58d
We don't exist just to satisfy hetero couple's threesome fantasies.
Fedegenerate@fedinsfw.app · 16 pts · 58d
I didn't think the /s was necessary... I thought the "we like your vibe" was cliche unicorn hunter speak. I even used the word 'unicorn'.
Anyways I fully agree, hence how I framed it. I fully apologise if I came off as anything other than tongue in cheek.
teolan@lemmy.world · -20 pts · 58d
The fact that is sarcasm doesn't change the fact that your comment suggests that threesomes are the thing you talk about when talking about bi/pan people.
budgard@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 57d
It literally does.
Fedegenerate@fedinsfw.app · 9 pts · 58d
Ah well, allow me to subvert that suggestion.
Expressly and unequivocally, threesomes are not something I particularly talk about when talking to bi/pan people.
Certainly not any more than anyone else. It isn't something I voluntarily suggest we do, it's not something I expressly ask about. Some of my friends have had threesomes, and some of those are bi/pan. So it's not something I've not talked about, it's just not the first thing that comes to mind.
Gork@sopuli.xyz · 21 pts · 58d
What do the columns, the stalactite-stalagmites grow from in this analogy.
FoxyFerengi@startrek.website · 33 pts · 58d
When a bisexual and a pansexual love each other very much... they grow together :)
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 58d
omnisexual, beats pansexual.
rockSlayer@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 58d
Agender, neopronoun, and nonbinary identities
Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 58d
Those are still covered under bisexual though. Technically, if you're a woman attracted to nonbinary people, you're heterosexual.
And this is why we invented new and better words.
rockSlayer@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 58d
My understanding is that bisexuals select all partners from both sexes and pansexuals select all partners from all genders
Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works · 6 pts · 58d
That understanding is wrong.
Bisexual means "homo and hetero sexual". So, "attracted to my own gender and not-my-own gender". Thats the classical definition.
And then people who didn't understand that, invented the world pansexual to mean exactly the same thing.
rockSlayer@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 58d
Do you have a resource to confirm what you're saying? Because homosexual means same sex and heterosexual is opposite sex. Bisexual would be both sexes by that reasoning
Sonotsugipaa@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 6 pts · 58d
"Heteros" means "different", not "opposite"
Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 58d
"hetero" means "different" not "opposite". The source would be any dictionary mentioning the root.
rockSlayer@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 58d
Your snarky comment about better understanding bisexuality and pansexuality does very little for my actual request for resources.
Starik@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 58d
Bisexuals grow from pansexuals dripping on them.
thinkercharmercoderfarmer@slrpnk.net · 5 pts · 58d
Bi-Bi relationships.
Archangel1313@lemmy.ca · 18 pts · 58d
Best explanation I've heard yet.
wewbull@feddit.uk · 11 pts · 58d
I just thought pansexuals didn't exclude furries.
CyberTheProtogen@lemmy.zip · 8 pts · 58d
What does this even mean?
ZombieMantis@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 57d
That they thought "bisexual" excluded furries, and "pansexual" included furries.
CyberTheProtogen@lemmy.zip · 8 pts · 57d
Why would anyone…? Huh?
Taleya@aussie.zone · 13 pts · 57d
Makes about as much sense as people who think bisexuality excludes trans and enbys
ZombieMantis@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 57d
I once knew a lady who thought pansexual meant "everything," and specifically actual animals. I had to explain that it's just bisexual but more.
jerkface@lemmy.ca · 0 pts · 51d
"Bi-" doesn't exclude them, but "pan-" exists to explicitly include them. Those aren't the same thing.
Taleya@aussie.zone · 1 pts · 51d
Its a meaningless distinction. We have more important fucking things to fight than whether or not you like old Queer terminology.
heartSagan5@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 57d
They don’t discriminate, like at all?
velma@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 0 pts · 57d
trublu@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 11 pts · 57d
The difference is that the pans got the better flag colors.
shneancy@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 57d
hell nah, the only reason why i don't call myself pan is because the flag colours are ugly
late sunset over a deep ocean vs printer toners
StarryPhoenix97@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 56d
Looks like the same ocean to me. Its just a different time of day.
uniquethrowagay@feddit.org · 6 pts · 57d
Hell nah! I use the bi label specifically because of the colors! (And because more people immediately unterstand what it means)
StarryPhoenix97@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 56d
cmbabul@slrpnk.net · 6 pts · 57d
It was recently pointed out to me that an outfit I have been rocking for years makes it look like I’m trying to be a walking bisexual flag: pink button up over a purple tank top with blue shorts. This was by coincidence do but I love those colors so I was fully prepared to die on the hill that it was the superior flag.
But after refreshing my memory, you right the pan flag looks like three flavors of ice cream stacked atop each other
ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 58d
I think pansexual should be for people who would fuck an alien who has no corollary on the human gender spectrum.
AntifaTeamLead@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 57d
Agree. I would take that alien and consensually do alien things with them.
HoneyMustardGas@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 58d
This made my day. If Lemmy had awards I would award this post but awards are pointless. So this comment will do. I laughed so hard at this.
Quill7513@slrpnk.net · 7 pts · 57d
i'm east coast bi west coast pan, because what the words mean are different on opposite sides of the US
Comrade_Spood@quokk.au · 6 pts · 57d
Honestly to me the difference is mostly cultural or vibes, and I just identify with bi vibes more. I feel like the flags encapsulate this difference well
Fleur_@aussie.zone · 5 pts · 57d
Pansexuals just over thought it tbh
Grail@multiverse.soulism.net · 5 pts · 58d
I'm biromantic; I like many different genders. But I most certainly do not like all genders. And those I do like, I do not like equally
vrek@programming.dev · 4 pts · 58d
Ok, i read the comments and... Now I'm regretting the cruisenart order on Amazon.... That saucepan though... Damn
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 3 pts · 58d
bisexual flowers do exists and theres variations of this too. and then theres mononecious, and unisexual plants. plants are all kinds of "sexuality." depending on the species.(apomixis, vegative growth, root cloning.) plants have all the "sexuals" that animals can dream of.
Rawrosaurus@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 3 pts · 58d
The only way to truly begin understanding pansexual or bisexual is to be either pansexual or bisexual.
glitchdx@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 56d
My interpretation:
If you're bisexual, it's about presented gender. If you're pansexual, it's about equipment.
velma@lemmy.blahaj.zone · -1 pts · 56d
Bisexual: attracted to those of their own gender and different genders
xzinik@feddit.cl · 1 pts · 55d
and panssexuals?
icelimit@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 55d
Sauté?
velma@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 0 pts · 55d
I'm bisexual so I really only feel qualified to assert that definition.
I believe that pansexuals are attracted despite gender. I dunno, I can't tell the difference between the two. I'm just old and bisexual feels like it fits better for me.
Nurse_Robot@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 58d
This is so weird for me. I thought my app was broken (and I'm thinking it is in a niche way) because suddenly almost no posts were loading. It turns out you just spammed a ton of posts, and they specifically won't load for me, but all other posts are fine. Weird.
Zannsolo@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 58d
I kinda thought pansexual was more open to the whole lgbtqi+ and bi people were more just into the lgb parts of the acronym.
teslekova@sh.itjust.works · 23 pts · 58d
Nah, that's the annoying myth that bi people hate. My partner is trans, and transitioned during our relationship, and I always joke that as a lazy bisexual this is perfect for me.
Really it's just old people (millenials) call it bi, and you young whipper-snappers with your eight track tapes get all pedantic about the sound of the word.
roguetrick@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 58d
The bisexual erasure's final form: generational.
anthropomorphized@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 58d
Yeah, generational, it grew branches. The phonetics of "bi" matter and the language is evolving. But we totally get the Bi doesn't mean two genders for that generation of queers that reached for that word.
Grail@multiverse.soulism.net · 5 pts · 58d
I'm into more than two, but not all genders.
Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works · 8 pts · 58d
"bisexual" doesn't mean "men and women". It means "homo and hetero", as in "those of my gender and not of my gender".
Which is exactly what "pansexual" also means.
Grail@multiverse.soulism.net · 4 pts · 58d
I'm into My own gender and some other genders but not all other genders. I'm not pan, because I'm not into all genders.
jerkface@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 51d
Two genders, eh. Everyone who isn't gay is attracted to every gender they don't belong to, eh.
Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 51d
That is the original meaning of those words. Yes. You might notice they're not exactly the most modern terms.
jerkface@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 51d
ahh see now you have retreated to "original" meaning. So by that metric, everyone who's heart is light (ie "gay") is attracted to everyone who is their gender.
captainlezbian@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 58d
Yeah as a trans woman I've never seen someone identify as bi and thought "I shouldn't hit on her" because of that label. And if I also found men attractive I'd almost certainly use that label.