pansexual is more "anything goes" including people with confusing genders--trannys and such.

bi is more like. Guys or girls, it don't matter. Pansexual is just. everything. at least, that's what Aven classified it as.

That's what I thought, but Brittany said since trans should still be considered just male or female that they count under bi.

Or that's the impression that I got, anyway.

Nah, it's different. Bi focuses a bit on the *sex*, Pan focuses on gender.

or rather, does not focus on either of them |D

Okay, that's what I thought. So going back to my original issue, then, how can you tell whether you're pansexual if you have not had the

opportunity to be attracted to anyone who is genderqueer, transsexual, etc. etc.?

I think it's just. Figuring it doesn't matter. Not being opposed to the idea? IDRK.

Which I guess translates into: can you only call yourself pansexual based on *experience*, or is it something you can posit?

Yeah, augh.

identifying as an asexual, i really don't fucking get most of the sexuality stuff :|a I think a lot of people forget the suffix "romantic"

you can be biromantic heterosexual. It's really fucked up. :\

I guess that depends on who defines the term. I have the feeling that a good deal of the LGTBQ community would not accept the positing. DX

Oh! Yeah, I know.

/too many months on aven forums >___>

I'm pretty sure I'm panromantic, too, but again there's the whole "I can't really speak from experience" thing.

ffft. Well. there's a lot of mystery behind the "a" and the "pan" because people don't get it |D one day they will. Maybe.

/kinda amused by how many glbtq etc people think asexuality is a disorder :|a

I find that upsetting, actually. :<

i used to. but a few years of being told LOL THERE'S SOMETHING WRONG WITH YOU BECAUSE YOU DON'T FIND PEOPLE SEXUALLY ATTRACTIVE makes it

Asexual people take a lot of shit sometimes -- usually not as much as the LGTBQ, granted -- and *everyone* kind of just. Brushes it off.

a normal thing to me |D;;;

D:

...In all honesty I've gotten less flack from people identifying as bi than identifying as (functionally) asexual.

Which is why I generally don't like people quantifying the whole "LGTBQs get more shit than asexuals" thing on *either* side because it is

totally a case-by-case thing depending on various conditions such as where you live etc.

Oh i never say that we get a lot of shit |D only that people don't get it. A lot of people don't understand that asexuality doesn't mean...

not interested in sex, or not finding anything sexually attractive--even As have sexual fetishes. Voice, certain parts of the body.

they just think OH THEY ARE NOT SEXUAL AT ALL. we just don't find. people sexually attractive? Aesthetically appealing, certainly.

but not sexually attractive.

my best friend from HS is actually sexually attracted to people wearing glasses. Not the people, exactly. The fact they're wearing glasses

/blah blah blah talk talk talk.

no, no i didn't mean it like that--i worded it wrong. Um. Maybe it'd be better to say genders that oppose their sex? I'm not good with

words.

confusing genders as in they might confuse *other* people.

no, that has another term. i don't remember it but it's not pansexual.

Actually, bisexuality is a sexual attraction to both *sexes*. When gender comes into play, that's when it turns into pansexuality.

gender doesn't have much to do with sexuality as far as attraction goes.

Like I said before, people forget that there is a suffix of "romantic" for being attracted to a specific gender.

Sexuality and romance are two very different things. Most people identifying as pansexual should probably identify as panromantic.

"gender doesn't have much to do with sexuality as far as attraction goes." Seriously? No.

That's not only wrong, it's horrible to say. Jesus.

Sexual attraction, as far as hetero/homo/bi goes should actually classify as what physically turns you on. What mentally turns you on--

gender--is... something different.

...not really? If something turns you on, it...turns you on.

^--this

which is why there's a clarification as to people sexually attracted to personality, rather than sex.

in my experience, pansexuality isn't about gender *or* sex. It's about personality.

there IS no such distinction. NOBODY SAYS THIS that isn't transphobic as hell. seriously. please stop.

What people chose to classify as shouldn't be offensive. A lot of people separate gender and sex.

... yes there is. It's not a major faction of hetero/homo/bi, but it's... existent.

Lots of people are TRANSPHOBIC AS FUCK and that doesn't make it okay!

You don't have to yell, I'm not saying I am :\ I'm just clarifying that there is a difference that most people don't distinguish.

Hot and sexually arousing are different.

Physical attraction and sexual attraction are different things.

doesn't think they are.

Really? Because i find a lot of people incredibly attractive, but I don't think anyone is sexually attractive. I think people are unsexy.

To be honest, this has way more to do with all the trans people you are UNGENDERING than it has to do with you.

For example: Anne hathaway--very, very physically attractive. Am I sexually attracted? no.

Dude, guys. I'm not the one sitting here making these distinctions--I'm only the one who did research on them for papers in college.

If you want to bitch at someone about "what about this this and this?" I am not a sexual psycologist. I didn't make the specifications.

Oh! You did research! You went to college! I HAD NO IDEA please carry on, nothing you're saying can be offensive at all right now.

I am not ungendering anyone, I'm just saying that some people wouldn't be attracted to someone if their gender and sex don't match.

You're protected by the shield of UNBIASED ACADEMIA NOTHING CAN PENETRATE IT NOW.

Um. No. Please stop putting words in my mouth? I'm explaining things as they were explained to me. --I'm not saying *you*.

My personal opinions aren't necessarily what I'm saying here, I'm saying it as what people conceive things to be.

Yeah she means me. I will cop to bitching at her and shouting but oh my god. *oh my god*

no. You're appropriating my sexual expression by saying I don't understand the way I'm attracted to people.

doesn't appreciate being told 'You'd be a panromantic if you only *knew better*.'

If you don't even believe what you are saying then WHY ARE YOU REPEATING THIS BULLSHIT HERE? if it's your opinion, fucking own it then.

IF NOT, WHY ARE YOU EXPOSING US TO THIS OFFENSIVE THINKING.

No, it was not.

Because this is the way the world freaking sees things, okay? Because even if you don't like something, there are some things people think.

Just like I said about asexuality being considered a disorder--it's offensive and disgusting, but that's the way the world sees asexuals!

I'm actually going to leave this plurk because I'm feeling incredibly disgusted and I'm afraid I may snap at someone who doesn't need to be

snapped at.

thank god

Sexuality is discovered personally on a case by case basis, but the official terms are decided by psycologists--and that's what they are.

What you identify as may be considered something completely different to psychologists, good bye.

GOOD BYE~~~~~~~~~~~

seriously fucking scientists man

with their

*science*

waves cheerfully!

that's totally why lots of practicing psychologists have never heard of pan and don't understand ace, rite?

because *psychologists defined ALL OF THIS*.

JANELLA WHAT ARE YOU DOING, DON"T YOU REALIZE SHE WENT TO COLLEGE

WE CAN'T DEBATE THIS

THE *SCIENCE* SPEAKS FOR ITSELF

HEY WAIT WHAT ABOUT *MY* COLLEGE?

TO KNOW WHY HER COLLEGE OVERRIDES MY COLLEGE

DUDE OUR COLLEGES DO NOT COUNT

also wants to know why she never learned about any of this SELF-EVIDENT SCIENCE in her college.

well on my first day at university I was taught that if anyone with a degree writes something down, it is true forever

didn't they tell you that?

must have missed that part.

but I have a degree now! And I have written stuff down! DOES THIS MEAN I AM *THE* SOURCE ON MEMORY?

--cripes, I go away to work and my Plurk explodes.

BASICALLY

get back here, Fedora, I want to tell you how your memory works. You have to listen to me, I wrote papers on it.

PERHAPS EVERYONE CAN STOP TALKING UNTIL MY LUNCH BREAK, PLEASE? THANK YOU.

, for two cents, Pansexual generally includes people who are gender *fluid* as well as trans, which bi does not usually imply.

I WOULD RATHER NOT HAVE FIGHTING ON MY TIMELINE WHILE I AM NOT AROUND TO REFEREE.

NOOOOOO TAAAAANZ \;~;

when I was introduced to the term, it was to help me label being super attracted to androgynous people, and those who were trans.

OKAY, ON THE OFFICIAL RECORD, everyone who has been or wants to be involved in this, please please PLEASE wait until at least 6pm PST when I

be available. Just hold onto your comments until then, all I'm saying!

I'll probably make an LJ post and move everything, this is just too ridiculously huge for Plurk now.

kiiiiiind of wants in on the LJ post, if you don't mind a creepy lurking trans boy stepping in...

Yeah, no worries! That might take slightly longer depending on how I process things here, though. XD

It's fine - I'd just be interested in participating in the discussion when it happens, that's all.