Deadpool will be pansexual in his upcoming movie.

[chuckman1]

I'm excited for the deadpool movie.
This sounds fitting for him, it's about time we get a badass that swings both ways.

Unrelated:
Is there a term for someone who likes women and finds some trans women attractive?
Straight?

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

Just because it's used in a different way to invalidate different people, doesn't mean they way I used it is wrong. Maybe a better example would be the famous Tumblr chart, with nonsense such as 'Aliosexual' which means you don't 'feel' any other sexuality fits you.

It's nonsense, more labels invented to either make someone feel special, or far more often, used to brow-beat others as insensitive and phobic.

Yes, because pansexuality as a defined sexuality was just thrown up by the tumblr crowd, not built up over decades, you know to help describe people who are attracted to basically anyone, regardless of parts. Except thats what pansexuality is, that's how pansexuality works, it means gender and gender identity aren't the target of attraction.

You call it nonsense, you're the one dismissing things with out doing any of the research. The people who use the identifier do so, because it tells people that the person in question doesn't care about gender when it comes to sexual attraction, no as a method of browbeating. Well at least that's how it's used in a real life, non-tumblr contexts. You seem to not understand why labels exist, they exist to classify things and people, when a new label comes up it's because the old labels don't cover all the variations. That's why pansexual came into existence and it's a term I've known since the 90's. So it's not some new tumblr browbeating scare term, it's a term that has more broad application than bisexual, regarding sexual preference. Your whole argument this time has been nonsensical and exclusionary. So take that for what you will, but arguing with someone whose being intentionally exclusionary with out backing up their side at all, just throwing personal opinion... Sorry to say I'm not going to take that position seriously, especially when one's gripe is with a sheltered group like blog denizens. Besides and more importantly, if the tumblrinas want to feel special, let them, I can't understand what value there is from trying to take that from them. Especially because harming their opinions and labels is what validates those opinions and labels, because it's easy to read as oppression and being oppressed gives one more validity.

Unrelated:
Is there a term for someone who likes women and finds some trans women attractive?
Straight?

A man, or boy, that is attract to women and trans women(some, or all trans women) would be considered by most reasonable people to be heterosexual/straight.

A woman who is attracted to women and trans women would be a lesbian.

To unreasonable people who are insecure with them selves though, a guy who has any interest at all in trans women would get labeled gay.

 

[Lightknight]

I think pansexual is a kind of silly denotation that doesn't need to be made in contrast with bisexual (to me it would be a silly as there being a term specifically for heterosexuals that are willing to date brunettes). But other than that it's true to the character so no biggy.

 

[mizushinzui]

I feel like this is in character for Deadpool but is almost entirely unnecessary for them to announce, feels more like a publicity move than any sort of character development.

I wouldn't be surprised if you begin to see more posts about the equality of the deadpool movie around the interwebs soon, doubt the filmmakers would miss a chance to use this for advertisement.

Having said that a lot of the content of the deadpool comics is stuff that I imagine would probably make SJW's scream, so if it's going to be faithful I can imagine it might actually get a few people riled up.

 

[Redryhno]

And this is important why?

I was not aware that deadpools sexuality was such a major point of his character in any way or form besides the ocasional sex joke.

I just wish people could stop making such a huge stink about who has what type of sexuality in this day and age. All it does is needlesly categorize people into collectives and create us vs them scenarios... you know.. like gender studies.

Well if nothing else, it IS true of him in the comics. He and Cable had some VERY homoerotic overtones, and Deadpool is attracted to Thor. A hole's a goal with the guy when you get right down to it.

Pretty much the only time Deadpool regretted sleeping with someone was when he slept with a female version of himself from an alternate universe. That was weird even by his standards.

Eh, I always just assumed that he just did that because he knew how much it bothered them and it being fucking hilarious to him, not because he was interested in boning them(though my knowledge of Deadpool is only the first two years he was in print, so maybe more shit happened). And he's pretty much always gravitated towards women, even when he got transported back to the original run of Spider-Man

As for pansexual, ok...don't much see how this is all that relevant. I mean, any sex scene they do will pretty much need him to keep wearing his bodysuit considering how fucking disgusting his skin looks from the Mutant DNA cocktail he injected himself with and his skin cancer(I forget the details). Or...they just can't do it from any serious perspective. It just won't work if they're going for a Deadpool movie. Even his interactions with Death, supposedly the love of each other's...lives(?), they crack jokes at and about each other, and that's sorta the extent of how "serious" they get with one another.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

I think pansexual is a kind of silly denotation that doesn't need to be made in contrast with bisexual (to me it would be a silly as there being a term specifically for heterosexuals that are willing to date brunettes). But other than that it's true to the character so no biggy.

Well keep in mind that a lot of bisexual people won't date any trans, intersex, or even agender person, because even bisexuals tend to cling to the gender binary. That's why pansexual and panromantic labels exist, as a panromantic myself, I can say with some confidence that the difference is buried in the gender binary. I don't hold much stock in the concept of the gender binary, even though I present so stereotypically feminine it's actually angered feminists before. Still to put it simply, someone's physical sex won't bother someone who is pan, same as a bisexual, but at the same time their gender identity is a non-issue too, unlike with most bisexual people.

 

[9tailedflame]

Yea, it only makes sense for deadpool to be pansexual. It would be very jarring for him to not be. It does seem weird for them to announce that, i mean it's deadpool, it can be reasonably assumed by anyone who knows even a little about deadpool. I almost cringe at the idea that this will attract the SJW crowd who don't know about deadpool, and then they'll be horrified because it's deadpool, he's a really offensive and politically incorrect guy. Then they'll protest, boycott, and get the game removed from theaters, maybe claiming that his activity is an attack on pansexuals or something on top of that, and it'll be a huge awful mess.

I wish they just didn't announce he was pansexual, then we could avoid all that drama. Anyone who knows deadpool knows he's a pansexual, or at least probably finds the idea that he has a normative or default sexuality laughable, so i think it would be better just to let it be assumed, and let the people who would enjoy the movie for deadpool go, not try to attract, and sortof mislead in a sense, a crowd that would otherwise not be caught dead watching deadpool.

 

[Lightknight]

I think pansexual is a kind of silly denotation that doesn't need to be made in contrast with bisexual (to me it would be a silly as there being a term specifically for heterosexuals that are willing to date brunettes). But other than that it's true to the character so no biggy.

Well keep in mind that a lot of bisexual people won't date any trans, intersex, or even agender person, because even bisexuals tend to cling to the gender binary. That's why pansexual and panromantic labels exist, as a panromantic myself, I can say with some confidence that the difference is buried in the gender binary. I don't hold much stock in the concept of the gender binary, even though I present so stereotypically feminine it's actually angered feminists before. Still to put it simply, someone's physical sex won't bother someone who is pan, same as a bisexual, but at the same time their gender identity is a non-issue too, unlike with most bisexual people.

Sure, and a lot of black/white people won't date white/black people. Creating a specific term for it would then imply that everyone simply under the generic header of "heterosexual" is then racist in their dating choices. So I'm not seeing the need to create specific terms for the additional subsets of the group you are or are not willing to fuck. These lables are really getting out of hand when they go the route of clarifying all subsets too.

 

[Coruptin]

I can hear the complaints now

"Oh, so you're portraying (x)sexuals to be schizophrenic psychos like Deadpool? YOU (x)IST PIGS!"

 

[Asita]

So he's Captain Jack Harkness then? This really doesn't surprise me.

 

[Erttheking]

I can hear the complaints now

"Oh, so you're portraying (x)sexuals to be schizophrenic psychos like Deadpool? YOU (x)IST PIGS!"

Really it seems to be more the other way around, with people complaining about political correctness gone mad.

If it turns out he gets complaints about political correctness gone mad AND being XIst...then I'm just fucking done with geek culture. Our squabbling has just gone from petty to downright pathetic.

 

[Lightknight]

I can hear the complaints now

"Oh, so you're portraying (x)sexuals to be schizophrenic psychos like Deadpool? YOU (x)IST PIGS!"

Really it seems to be more the other way around, with people complaining about political correctness gone mad.

If it turns out he gets complaints about political correctness gone mad AND being XIst...then I'm just fucking done with geek culture. Our squabbling has just gone from petty to downright pathetic.

Oh come on, you know he's going to get complaints from both. The world we live in now is a damned if you do, damned if don't in every scenario. The good news though is at some point the people bitching are just going to become such white noise that artists will finally be able to ignore them again and produce genuine art again.

 

[DudeistBelieve]

Not good enough, I need him to gender identify with Mayonnaise as well.

I'll also accept Miracle Whip.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

Sure, and a lot of black/white people won't date white/black people. Creating a specific term for it would then imply that everyone simply under the generic header of "heterosexual" is then racist in their dating choices. So I'm not seeing the need to create specific terms for the additional subsets of the group you are or are not willing to fuck. These lables labels are really getting out of hand when they go the route of clarifying all subsets too.

Keep in mind that pansexual is a fairly old term as sexuality terms go, at least anymore. Besides that having a racial preference for dating isn't that unusual, neither is having an age range preference for that matter. Still pansexual is far from clarifying all subsets, it's actually a term/label for people who basically don't count physical sex, or gender identity in relation to their attraction. It might sound unreasonable to have such labels to you, but for people like me whom it has a meaningful definition to identify ones feelings, it's not that unreasonable. Having a way to define one's self correctly is kind of important, at least on a personal level.

Edit/Side note: I didn't correct your spelling to be mean Lightknight, I did it because every time I spell labels, I misspell it and it drives me batty. So I'm trying to get into the habit of spelling it right every time now.

 

[Lightknight]

Sure, and a lot of black/white people won't date white/black people. Creating a specific term for it would then imply that everyone simply under the generic header of "heterosexual" is then racist in their dating choices. So I'm not seeing the need to create specific terms for the additional subsets of the group you are or are not willing to fuck. These lables labels are really getting out of hand when they go the route of clarifying all subsets too.

Keep in mind that pansexual is a fairly old term as sexuality terms go, at least anymore. Besides that having a racial preference for dating isn't that unusual, neither is having an age range preference for that matter. Still pansexual is far from clarifying all subsets, it's actually a term/label for people who basically don't count physical sex, or gender identity in relation to their attraction. It might sound unreasonable to have such labels to you, but for people like me whom it has a meaningful definition to identify ones feelings, it's not that unreasonable. Having a way to define one's self correctly is kind of important, at least on a personal level.

It just seems like they're saying, "He's bisexual, and that is even if the people are X". It seems to single out "X" as abnormal aberrant subclasses that one wouldn't normally assume to fall into the category when bisexual just means you find both sexes attractive. Sexuality is not typically assigned to gender so much as sex. So a person being transsexual should inherently still be considered within the realm of the standard binary sexes even if the gender/sex combination is more complex. It's not like transsexuals take on the appearance of a third sex. They present as one or the other and sometimes an amalgamation of the two but not a third and distinct sex that would make them not contained within the set of bisexual interests.

It is far more normal to differentiate based on subsets when a person mostly meets the overall category except the one being discussed. So I don't think Pansexual makes sense but a term for a bisexual that isn't interested in transsexuals would be viable. The assumption should be made that pansexuals fall within the binary sex category both physically and with the one they identify as.

[/Edit/Side note: I didn't correct your spelling to be mean Lightknight, I did it because every time I spell labels, I misspell it and it drives me batty. So I'm trying to get into the habit of spelling it right every time now.

When time is limited it is more important to convey a message than it is to convey the message formally. Fortunately, lable doesn't have any definition and therefore should never be taken as meaning anything other than label.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

Sure, and a lot of black/white people won't date white/black people. Creating a specific term for it would then imply that everyone simply under the generic header of "heterosexual" is then racist in their dating choices. So I'm not seeing the need to create specific terms for the additional subsets of the group you are or are not willing to fuck. These lables labels are really getting out of hand when they go the route of clarifying all subsets too.

Keep in mind that pansexual is a fairly old term as sexuality terms go, at least anymore. Besides that having a racial preference for dating isn't that unusual, neither is having an age range preference for that matter. Still pansexual is far from clarifying all subsets, it's actually a term/label for people who basically don't count physical sex, or gender identity in relation to their attraction. It might sound unreasonable to have such labels to you, but for people like me whom it has a meaningful definition to identify ones feelings, it's not that unreasonable. Having a way to define one's self correctly is kind of important, at least on a personal level.

It just seems like they're saying, "He's bisexual, and that is even if the people are X". It seems to single out "X" as abnormal aberrant subclasses that one wouldn't normally assume to fall into the category when bisexual just means you find both sexes attractive. Sexuality is not typically assigned to gender so much as sex. So a person being transsexual should inherently still be considered within the realm of the standard binary sexes even if the gender/sex combination is more complex. It's not like transsexuals take on the appearance of a third sex. They present as one or the other and sometimes an amalgamation of the two but not a third and distinct sex that would make them not contained within the set of bisexual interests.

It is far more normal to differentiate based on subsets when a person mostly meets the overall category except the one being discussed. So I don't think Pansexual makes sense but a term for a bisexual that isn't interested in transsexuals would be viable. The assumption should be made that pansexuals fall within the binary sex category both physically and with the one they identify as.

First off, transsexual really only applies to people who have had, or are actively seeking a sex change operation, so that's a bit narrow of a term when dealing with everyone who qualifies as transgender. I know quite a lot of trans folk who are non-binary, because identifying differently than your sex assigned at birth tends to add fluidity to one's gender identity. A lot of people who consider them selves bisexual will still never date a woman who has, or had, a penis. For that matter the opposite is true concerning a man who has, or had a vagina. Being able to tell someone you're pansexual, or panromantic is at least a direct way of identifying to them that their plumbing and identity don't matter in terms of interest. Regardless of weather the interest is sexual, romantic, or both.

It's less about subsets and more about having an easy way to identify one's attractions than socially classifying one's self. It's just the fact that pansexual and panromantic means a person is open to having partners who are non-binary, that makes all the difference. Because trans folk aren't binary people, trans folk might express themselves within the binary, but because identity and biology conflict, we're non-binary by our very nature. So are intersex people for that matter. The reason is that the binary only works when gender identity and physical sex match, when they don't the people therein fall outside the binary. This is the exact reason trans panic is a thing, because people dating someone trans, but not knowing that person is trans, then finding out suddenly... That changes all of the dynamics.

To be totally clear every bisexual person I've ever dated freaked out when they found out I was trans, every pan person I've dated didn't care in the slightest. So the separation is important. I know there are bi folk who'd have no problem with my being trans, but the vast majority do. On the other hand the majority of pan folk don't have any issue with it. So the distinction is important, even if it has basically no application in your life.

Edit/Side note: I didn't correct your spelling to be mean Lightknight, I did it because every time I spell labels, I misspell it and it drives me batty. So I'm trying to get into the habit of spelling it right every time now.

When time is limited it is more important to convey a message than it is to convey the message formally. Fortunately, lable doesn't have any definition and therefore should never be taken as meaning anything other than label.

I understand but lable still gets a red underline in my spell checker, where label doesn't.

 

[MerlinCross]

In the comics, Deadpool swings both ways.
But I can bet that, for all the noise the movie producers are making.... we will NOT see Deadpool hit on a man in it.

OH I can see him hitting on a man. Played straight or for laughs is the question. And because it is Deadpool, either way is kinda in charcter for him.

 

[Captain Marvelous_v1legacy]

Deadpool is the type of guy that would bone a pencil sharpener. Pansexuality fits way too well. We're likely not going to see him boning a guy anyway.

 

[Creator002]

As a lot of others have said and from what I've heard, this sounds like Deadpool. It really isn't surprising in the least for me.

 

[Silvanus]

Oh come on, you know he's going to get complaints from both. The world we live in now is a damned if you do, damned if don't in every scenario. The good news though is at some point the people bitching are just going to become such white noise that artists will finally be able to ignore them again and produce genuine art again.

For as long as art has existed, it has always existed alongside criticism-- social, moral, artistic, etcetera. The freedom of the artist has never been stronger than in the last fifty or so years, in Western Europe at any rate, and it is relatively strong today. The notion that artists are somehow prevented from expressing themselves to a greater extent than in some mythical past, and that critics need to shut up to bring them that missing freedom, is romantic nonsense. "Genuine art" is created alongside criticism throughout history, that's clear.