Your thought on... Pansexuality

[Lieju]

You like who you like. Nobody cares.

Ahaha. I'd love that to be the case but unfortunately assholes do care. I'd love to live in your little hugbox where homophobia and transphobia apparently don't exist though.

I didn't use to think me being a lesbian was a big deal. Then I started being out and it became apparent it was a big deal for a lot of people I had thought wouldn't care...

 

[Parasondox]

Let's get personal here. I use to consider myself straight and fought feelings but in the past few years... decades, I've grown attraction to guys too. Heck, I have dated and been with guys before. Para in denial. Well, he was. So I accepted myself as bi but then when I discovered the pansexual definitions, a thought came into my head think, "am i that?" But really I am just one who doesn't care about a person's gender or sex and would just find attraction with anyone really. I just didn't want to label it.

It takes a certain amount of courage to be open and honest on these matters online that can open oneself to a lot of unnecessary hassle from ignorant people, that is admirable by itself. But it also helps share understanding to those who may think only negative connotations with the "label" due to only thinking from their own experience. All this talk of "special snowflake" sounds more like bitter projection of personal insecurity unable to utilise empathy than any useful intelligent insight.

Thank you Xsjadoblayde. My favourite man eating bear. Sadly, I expect ignorance and abuse online cause I've seen the hate even for the smallest thing like a persons shirt. Those I know may, would or will have strong views on it. Also I don't know where this buzzword "special snowflake" is coming from. Like, homophobia or any other hate and phobias aren't gone. They are still here and many hidden in unknown areas. I dunno. It's like the word "cuck" being used all of a sudden. It's been in porn for decades now. Why use it now?

Btw this is the part where Para makes zero sense. Nothing to see here.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Like, homophobia or any other hate and phobias aren't gone.

And we aren't going to get everyone to accept that any time soon. It's always been somehow not really an issue, at least according to some, and I don't see that changing.

 

[Silvanus]

I guess this is where you and I differ. I believe self-identification is harmful. It's elevating one aspect of your personhood as the whole being. Also, these self-identification are used to separate people from each other. I'd rather identify as a "human being". I like to relate to other people as human beings. Not as whatever label they like to call themselves.

Well, it's only elevating that one characteristic if you lead with it, and put aside all the others, but people don't tend to do that.

People tend to use these labels when they're relevant. If someone asks you whether you're gay, straight or bi because they want to set you up with someone, it's not terribly helpful to reply that you're "human".

 

[Chimpzy_v1legacy]

Whatever floats your boat, so long as no one is getting hurt.

Just file me under: 'whatever, you do you'.

 

[Just Ebola]

As a term, I think it's wholly unnecessary. When someone identifies as bisexual, they can appreciate and be attracted to both genders. So it stands to reason that anyone who falls between male and female can be found attractive by said bisexual person (depending on their personal quirks and preferences).

The argument is that "bi" excludes anything other than two genders. Myself, I'm not fussed, but if people want to make a distinction, fair enough.

I've heard the argument, I just don't think it's a valid one. There's nothing exclusionary about bisexuality, so there's no point in adding modifier after modifier. People love to complicate what should be simple, but if some people want to come up with a laundry list of arbitrary labels to wear, they certainly can.

Just as I can continue to think of it as pointless.

 

[DudeistBelieve]

I guess this is where you and I differ. I believe self-identification is harmful. It's elevating one aspect of your personhood as the whole being. Also, these self-identification are used to separate people from each other. I'd rather identify as a "human being". I like to relate to other people as human beings. Not as whatever label they like to call themselves.

Well, it's only elevating that one characteristic if you lead with it, and put aside all the others, but people don't tend to do that.

People tend to use these labels when they're relevant. If someone asks you whether you're gay, straight or bi because they want to set you up with someone, it's not terribly helpful to reply that you're "human".

I gotta disagree.

Some people wrap their identities in these labels like a teenager going goth in high school. That's what I always found terribly frightening cause then that shit devolves into tribalism.

 

[Saelune]

I guess this is where you and I differ. I believe self-identification is harmful. It's elevating one aspect of your personhood as the whole being. Also, these self-identification are used to separate people from each other. I'd rather identify as a "human being". I like to relate to other people as human beings. Not as whatever label they like to call themselves.

Well, it's only elevating that one characteristic if you lead with it, and put aside all the others, but people don't tend to do that.

People tend to use these labels when they're relevant. If someone asks you whether you're gay, straight or bi because they want to set you up with someone, it's not terribly helpful to reply that you're "human".

I gotta disagree.

Some people wrap their identities in these labels like a teenager going goth in high school. That's what I always found terribly frightening cause then that shit devolves into tribalism.

And some people make a big deal out of people who make a big deal out of it, and that isnt helping anything either.

And some people value some specific part of their identity so strongly either cause they have been ostracized for being that, so they instead try to use it as a shield, or because they have nothing else to relate to people with. Abusing them further for it is not going to help anything.

I wish being gay or trans was treated as normal as being straight or male, then gay and trans people would be less inclined to make a big deal out of it themselves. And its not like many men and women, or straight people dont make such a big deal about their own identity, but because it is considered more "normal" people dont throw a fit about it.

 

[Silvanus]

I gotta disagree.

Some people wrap their identities in these labels like a teenager going goth in high school. That's what I always found terribly frightening cause then that shit devolves into tribalism.

Well, some folks do, as some folks do with anything, not just sexuality. The problem isn't then with the label itself. Plenty of other people are using them fine.

 

[Delicious Anathema]

I see it how I see other non-heterosexual behaviors, an (admittedly harmless) anomaly or dysfunction that is not Nature's intended way, but if that's not a problem to them, fine. I don't consider it normal though.

 

[Patathatapon]

I think everyone should have the same opinion as me on homosexuality, pansexuality, transgenders, etc etc list can go on for years.

"I just don't give a fuck"

You want to be with the same gender? Power to you! You want to be the gender you weren't assigned at birth? Power to you! You want to come up to me on the street and say "I'M GAY, AND IF YOU DON'T LIKE THAT YOU CAN SUCK MY LEFT TESTICLE", Power to you! Though if you do do that, I will likely view you as a fucking idiot. I just don't get why people care so much about what other people want to do with their lives. It's not like being gay/pan/whatever means that they're going to rape you on sight.

On the term of "phases" to me this is a simple solution. You could not convince me to be gay. You could not make me aroused by two men fucking. The way I see it, a persons biological composition of their mind decides what they like, or how they feel to others. People who say things like "Homosexuality is a choice" are basically saying "I could be gay, and I openly admit that".

 

[Chareater]

When it comes to stuff like gender and sexuality I really don't care if its two consenting adults do what you like.

As many on this thread have said. its none of my business.

What does annoy me is if you scream at people who don't think your gender/sexuality is a real thing.

Some people can't/won't accept that your gender is a real thing and I think its important to let people naturally adjust rather than screaming at how they are monsters.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Some people can't/won't accept that your gender is a real thing

Which is a very serious failing on their part. Not knowing about a sexuality, sure, it's a complicated issue. But to say to someone "nuh-uh, that's not a real thing" leads to all sorts of problems. LGBT people have long been discriminated against, and attitudes like that play a large part in it.

 

[Chareater]

Which is a very serious failing on their part. Not knowing about a sexuality, sure, it's a complicated issue. But to say to someone "nuh-uh, that's not a real thing" leads to all sorts of problems. LGBT people have long been discriminated against, and attitudes like that play a large part in it.

Fair point but my point is you need to let society naturally adjust.

The Pansexuals who treat people who don't believe in their sexuality with disdain only create more distain for them.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Fair point but my point is you need to let society naturally adjust.

The Pansexuals who treat people who don't believe in their sexuality with disdain only create more distain for them.

In theory, yes, in practice that leaves marginalised groups having to play nice until people feel like not marginalising them anymore. That doesn't tend to work.

 

[Saelune]

Which is a very serious failing on their part. Not knowing about a sexuality, sure, it's a complicated issue. But to say to someone "nuh-uh, that's not a real thing" leads to all sorts of problems. LGBT people have long been discriminated against, and attitudes like that play a large part in it.

Fair point but my point is you need to let society naturally adjust.

The Pansexuals who treat people who don't believe in their sexuality with disdain only create more distain for them.

Waiting for society to naturally adjust is a very bad idea. You have to force society to adjust. Dont believe me? Look at every civil rights movement ever.

 

[happyninja42]

Which is a very serious failing on their part. Not knowing about a sexuality, sure, it's a complicated issue. But to say to someone "nuh-uh, that's not a real thing" leads to all sorts of problems. LGBT people have long been discriminated against, and attitudes like that play a large part in it.

Fair point but my point is you need to let society naturally adjust.

The Pansexuals who treat people who don't believe in their sexuality with disdain only create more distain for them.

Waiting for society to naturally adjust is a very bad idea. You have to force society to adjust. Dont believe me? Look at every civil rights movement ever.

I think what the poster was trying to say was that in order for society as a whole, to accept a new aspect, it needs time to start seeing that as part of "normal". And that takes time. Not just the passing of laws specifically regarding that issue, which is the civil rights aspect of things. But the run of the mill, joe on the street, reaction to things. That for the most part, that level of acceptance is from exposure, and time, and new generations growing up seeing it as just another thing. Not that fighting for the rights isn't necessary, but that fight isn't what makes the public really incorporate the new paradigm into their concept of "normal".

I'm reminded of a podcast I occasionally listen to, and one of the hosts talked about the difference in LGBT acceptance based on age. How he, in his 50's, sees a lot of people in his age bracket who don't like it, or are somewhat resistant to it. But when he asked his 3 kids (who are roughly pre-teen to teenagers) about what they thought of LGBT issues, they didn't care at all. He said "Their reaction was about as intense as if I'd told them I was left handed. They just don't care, it's not something they find strange."

In the long run, I think that's where the acceptance truly comes from, raising generations with those concepts presented as normal, and the eventual dying off of the old fuddy duddies who want those LGBT kids to get off their damn lawn with their glitter and feather boas.

 

[Saelune]

Which is a very serious failing on their part. Not knowing about a sexuality, sure, it's a complicated issue. But to say to someone "nuh-uh, that's not a real thing" leads to all sorts of problems. LGBT people have long been discriminated against, and attitudes like that play a large part in it.

Fair point but my point is you need to let society naturally adjust.

The Pansexuals who treat people who don't believe in their sexuality with disdain only create more distain for them.

Waiting for society to naturally adjust is a very bad idea. You have to force society to adjust. Dont believe me? Look at every civil rights movement ever.

I think what the poster was trying to say was that in order for society as a whole, to accept a new aspect, it needs time to start seeing that as part of "normal". And that takes time. Not just the passing of laws specifically regarding that issue, which is the civil rights aspect of things. But the run of the mill, joe on the street, reaction to things. That for the most part, that level of acceptance is from exposure, and time, and new generations growing up seeing it as just another thing. Not that fighting for the rights isn't necessary, but that fight isn't what makes the public really incorporate the new paradigm into their concept of "normal".

I'm reminded of a podcast I occasionally listen to, and one of the hosts talked about the difference in LGBT acceptance based on age. How he, in his 50's, sees a lot of people in his age bracket who don't like it, or are somewhat resistant to it. But when he asked his 3 kids (who are roughly pre-teen to teenagers) about what they thought of LGBT issues, they didn't care at all. He said "Their reaction was about as intense as if I'd told them I was left handed. They just don't care, it's not something they find strange."

In the long run, I think that's where the acceptance truly comes from, raising generations with those concepts presented as normal, and the eventual dying off of the old fuddy duddies who want those LGBT kids to get off their damn lawn with their glitter and feather boas.

Well, its waves. Those kids dont find it so weird because it was at first forcefully pushed to acknowledge LGBT people. If not for the heavier handed gay rights movements of the 70's, those kids might not be so unbothered. Its the grandkids and great grand kids of those forced to accept it who naturally accept it.

 

[happyninja42]

Which is a very serious failing on their part. Not knowing about a sexuality, sure, it's a complicated issue. But to say to someone "nuh-uh, that's not a real thing" leads to all sorts of problems. LGBT people have long been discriminated against, and attitudes like that play a large part in it.

Fair point but my point is you need to let society naturally adjust.

The Pansexuals who treat people who don't believe in their sexuality with disdain only create more distain for them.

Waiting for society to naturally adjust is a very bad idea. You have to force society to adjust. Dont believe me? Look at every civil rights movement ever.

I think what the poster was trying to say was that in order for society as a whole, to accept a new aspect, it needs time to start seeing that as part of "normal". And that takes time. Not just the passing of laws specifically regarding that issue, which is the civil rights aspect of things. But the run of the mill, joe on the street, reaction to things. That for the most part, that level of acceptance is from exposure, and time, and new generations growing up seeing it as just another thing. Not that fighting for the rights isn't necessary, but that fight isn't what makes the public really incorporate the new paradigm into their concept of "normal".

I'm reminded of a podcast I occasionally listen to, and one of the hosts talked about the difference in LGBT acceptance based on age. How he, in his 50's, sees a lot of people in his age bracket who don't like it, or are somewhat resistant to it. But when he asked his 3 kids (who are roughly pre-teen to teenagers) about what they thought of LGBT issues, they didn't care at all. He said "Their reaction was about as intense as if I'd told them I was left handed. They just don't care, it's not something they find strange."

In the long run, I think that's where the acceptance truly comes from, raising generations with those concepts presented as normal, and the eventual dying off of the old fuddy duddies who want those LGBT kids to get off their damn lawn with their glitter and feather boas.

Well, its waves. Those kids dont find it so weird because it was at first forcefully pushed to acknowledge LGBT people. If not for the heavier handed gay rights movements of the 70's, those kids might not be so unbothered. Its the grandkids and great grand kids of those forced to accept it who naturally accept it.

....yes, that's exactly what I just said. Forcing them to accept it usually doesn't make them actually "accept" it, more tolerate it. But then, after a few generations, it becomes a regular occurrence. Which is what I was saying.

 

[Saelune]

Which is a very serious failing on their part. Not knowing about a sexuality, sure, it's a complicated issue. But to say to someone "nuh-uh, that's not a real thing" leads to all sorts of problems. LGBT people have long been discriminated against, and attitudes like that play a large part in it.

Fair point but my point is you need to let society naturally adjust.

The Pansexuals who treat people who don't believe in their sexuality with disdain only create more distain for them.

Waiting for society to naturally adjust is a very bad idea. You have to force society to adjust. Dont believe me? Look at every civil rights movement ever.

I think what the poster was trying to say was that in order for society as a whole, to accept a new aspect, it needs time to start seeing that as part of "normal". And that takes time. Not just the passing of laws specifically regarding that issue, which is the civil rights aspect of things. But the run of the mill, joe on the street, reaction to things. That for the most part, that level of acceptance is from exposure, and time, and new generations growing up seeing it as just another thing. Not that fighting for the rights isn't necessary, but that fight isn't what makes the public really incorporate the new paradigm into their concept of "normal".

I'm reminded of a podcast I occasionally listen to, and one of the hosts talked about the difference in LGBT acceptance based on age. How he, in his 50's, sees a lot of people in his age bracket who don't like it, or are somewhat resistant to it. But when he asked his 3 kids (who are roughly pre-teen to teenagers) about what they thought of LGBT issues, they didn't care at all. He said "Their reaction was about as intense as if I'd told them I was left handed. They just don't care, it's not something they find strange."

In the long run, I think that's where the acceptance truly comes from, raising generations with those concepts presented as normal, and the eventual dying off of the old fuddy duddies who want those LGBT kids to get off their damn lawn with their glitter and feather boas.

Well, its waves. Those kids dont find it so weird because it was at first forcefully pushed to acknowledge LGBT people. If not for the heavier handed gay rights movements of the 70's, those kids might not be so unbothered. Its the grandkids and great grand kids of those forced to accept it who naturally accept it.

....yes, that's exactly what I just said. Forcing them to accept it usually doesn't make them actually "accept" it, more tolerate it. But then, after a few generations, it becomes a regular occurrence. Which is what I was saying.

But was it what Chareater was saying?

Some people say "I just dont want it shoved in my face" and mean they dont want someone being just annoying, and other people saying it meaning they dont want gay people to even exist around them.