Sexuality

Like I said; bisexuality is attraction to either sex, whereas pansexuality is attraction regardless of sex (or gender). There is more to gender (or sex) than a simple binary.

Pwnemon said:

A bi person will still only have sex with people they consider "hot", a pan is just as likely to bang Mr. Creosote as Megan Fox.

Sorta.

Click to expand...

wut

For the people that actually understand pansexuality, I've got a niggling question; if pansexual people don't discriminate between gender, would that mean that they can't really "prefer" a gender? I'm bisexual and I'm attracted to those who don't really fit into the conventional gender binary, but sometimes I'll prefer men and at other times women.

Cirrus said:

wut

For the people that actually understand pansexuality, I've got a niggling question; if pansexual people don't discriminate between gender, would that mean that they can't really "prefer" a gender? I'm bisexual and I'm attracted to those who don't really fit into the conventional gender binary, but sometimes I'll prefer men and at other times women.

Click to expand...

Just like some bisexuals say they "prefer" one over another, pansexuals might have quirks or "preferences", as well. I think "girls" or more effeminate-looking people are more attractive from a visual standpoint, but there are cisgendered guys and FtMs/genderqueers I find cute and attractive, as well. I'm open to the whole spectrum, per se, I just lean towards effeminate as far as looks go. Yes, I understand that may sound perfectly hypocritical, but that's the English language for you.

As far as genitalia goes, I think penises are sexier than vaginas, but I'd have more "fun" with a vagina, I'd think. So, uh, both have their charm.

Major support for all the other Aces out there ^^ ((For clarity's sake, 'Ace' is a semi-common term for someone identifying as asexual, at least where I'm from. Also, it's a more fun name.))

Not to imply a lack of support for other orientations, or imply that Aces need "support," as such. I still don't quite understand how they/we get grouped under the LGBT/ongoing acronym. Perhaps because, if you're not "straight," you must go under the banner. Or a fervor of acceptance, I dunno.

As for the whole bi/pan thing, as far as I can tell, no one actually knows the difference. Heck, they don't know exactly what any kind of sexuality means. They just pretend loudly and often. Or perhaps that's just me. ^^ I'm inclined to go with the latter interpretation.

In slightly less flippant matters, I'd like to ask (or wonder aloud) why asexuality is so often seen as a "transition orientation," rather than a "permanent" one. By that, I mean, for example, if someone says they're hetero/straight, they're not often asked when they'll change. If they say they're homo/gay/lesbian, it's assumed that "yes, they're sure." Somewhat more often, bis/pans will be asked when they're going to choose one or the other (or the other or the other or....), but that's often considered rude. However, if I say I'm "not interested" in sex or closer relationships, it's often followed by something like, "But if you had to choose..." or "When do you think you'll decided?" as though this were just a phase, like being a teenager. To me, it seems just as rude to assume I will/have to change as to assume a pan/bi/gay/straight person is going to change their minds. It happens, sure, but it's never a given thing.
tldr; STOP ASSUMING ACES WILL CHANGE WAAAAAAA. And don't assume you have to, neither.

Finally, I want to thank the contributors to this topic, as it inspired me to actually look up the Kinsey scale. Turns out I'd been interpreting it wrong for years; I thought 0 = Ace, 1 = All/Mostly Hetero, and so on.

Aaah, I'm so with you there. Actually, I don't understand why transgender people are grouped in with gays and bis, either, since who they're attracted to doesn't really come into it. You can be trans and perfectly heterosexual. Aside from likely getting prejudice (and to a much greater degree) from the same people, they're not really group-together-able.

I get really annoyed when people don't understand asexuality, too. Sure, I haven't ever heard of someone getting beaten up or disonwed or whatever for being gay or bi, but at least people generally understand what it is, and we get some representation in the media, while just about every film, book, TV show or whatever has a romantic plot or subplot. LGB people have some media of their own, but society tells people unrelentingly that romantic attachments are the most important relationships in the world!!! And that's gotta be pretty isolating for you guys :/

Dannichu said:

Aaah, I'm so with you there. Actually, I don't understand why transgender people are grouped in with gays and bis, either, since who they're attracted to doesn't really come into it. You can be trans and perfectly heterosexual. Aside from likely getting prejudice (and to a much greater degree) from the same people, they're not really group-together-able.

I get really annoyed when people don't understand asexuality, too. Sure, I haven't ever heard of someone getting beaten up or disonwed or whatever for being gay or bi, but at least people generally understand what it is, and we get some representation in the media, while just about every film, book, TV show or whatever has a romantic plot or subplot. LGB people have some media of their own, but society tells people unrelentingly that romantic attachments are the most important relationships in the world!!! And that's gotta be pretty isolating for you guys :/

Click to expand...

While I agree with you, you should remember that there's a difference between asexuality and aromance (or whatever the word would be). Being asexual does not mean you don't want to be in a romantic relationship.

But yes, the media, society and everything sucks because it makes it look like everyone wants love and sex. Eff them.

Dannichu said:

I get really annoyed when people don't understand asexuality, too. Sure, I haven't ever heard of someone getting beaten up or disonwed or whatever for being gay or bi, but at least people generally understand what it is, and we get some representation in the media, while just about every film, book, TV show or whatever has a romantic plot or subplot. LGB people have some media of their own, but society tells people unrelentingly that romantic attachments are the most important relationships in the world!!! And that's gotta be pretty isolating for you guys :/

Click to expand...

I don't think I've ever told anyone I'm asexual (except here) and had them even think that was actually a thing :p Being aromantic as well makes it doubly annoying with the aforementioned insistence everyone has that EVERYBODY MUST BE IN LOVE OR ELSE GRRR. But then virtually everbody wants to since hardly anybody is asexual and/or aromantic so that's not completely unreasonable.

Though it is fun when people think asexuality means I can reproduce by mitosis.

Mike the Foxhog said:

I don't think I've ever told anyone I'm asexual (except here) and had them even think that was actually a thing :p Being aromantic as well makes it doubly annoying with the aforementioned insistence everyone has that EVERYBODY MUST BE IN LOVE OR ELSE GRRR. But then virtually everbody wants to since hardly anybody is asexual and/or aromantic so that's not completely unreasonable.

Click to expand...

According to the great wiki that knows all, about 1% of the population is "asexual." How many are aromantic isn't as easy to guess, but, even at that percentage, one would think there'd be some literature/media/attention on it. Alas, biology and society tell us life is for bonking, so bonking we must want.

Mike the Foxhog said:

Though it is fun when people think asexuality means I can reproduce by mitosis.

Click to expand...

Yeah, or that you're a plant, or a starfish. ((Yes, someone asked me if I was "like a starfish." Yes, starfish have genders. It wasn't a very...biologically-minded person.))

I thought plants were sort of hermaphroditic? or am I just mixed up?

sreservoir said:

I thought plants were sort of hermaphroditic? or am I just mixed up?

Click to expand...

depends on the species. Some plants have both sets of sex organs (though self-pollination is usually avoided) and others, I believe, have separate male and female plants.

ole_schooler said:

Yeah, or that you're a plant, or a starfish. ((Yes, someone asked me if I was "like a starfish." Yes, starfish have genders. It wasn't a very...biologically-minded person.))

Click to expand...

"Yes, I'm a starfish. I reproduce asexually and defecate from my mouth :D
Hey why are you running"

They were probably mistaking mitosis with the ability to grow back into a whole starfish if you chop it up or something. Which would be equally cool.

You could always be a shark! They make baby clones of themselves if there aren't any boy sharks :>

I once told a few classmates that I was ace, and was promptly told that meant I could split myself, that I was wrong, and that I needed to meet a hot guy and all my perceptions would change in a flash! But someone did listen enough to ask me if I wasn't lonely with my clear disinterest in romantic relationships. I told them that I'm perfectly happy with friends, which just got me a load of weird looks. :/ That was an interesting math class. Didn't help that the whole thing started out from being asked why I kept refusing a make-over from one of the girls, which led to asking why I didn't care about appearance, and asking if I was gay or even bi in a hushed tone. That confused me - is being bisexual even worse than gay in the perceptions of narrowminded people? O_o High school students - at least here, since it's a Catholic school - make no sense most of the time.

My friends know I'm aromantic ace, though, and once I met up with them in the library. I struck a pose and announced that I had been called to a life of celibacy by God, whilst doing dramatic jazzhands. Given I don't follow Christianity, I got a whole ton of laughs from them. Fun times~

Jessie said:

You could always be a shark! They make baby clones of themselves if there aren't any boy sharks :>

Click to expand...

But if they stop moving they apparently die for some reason. And I hardly move at all.

Stormecho said:

That confused me - is being bisexual even worse than gay in the perceptions of narrowminded people?

Click to expand...

Certain people seem to equate bisexuality with nymphomania. That might be it?

Oh yay, asexuality/aromanticism discussion. As I've said before, I'm in an odd situation where I'm pretty sure I'm aromantic but also pretty sure I'm not asexual. Which is apparently unheard of because all aromantic people are asexual too, or something.

I mean, I guess there's a chance of it just being 'not having met the right person yet' as I'm sure just about everyone I will ever explain this to will try to tell me. But I've gone my entire teenage life barely even thinking about being in a relationship. I've listened to every single one of my friends talk about how they wish they had a boyfriend/girlfriend/etc, and about how they've had crushes on people and so on, and that... doesn't happen with me. It feels weird seeing people younger than me feel weird for not being in a relationship when I've never been in one and really can't care less. I don't even understand what makes romantic and platonic relationships different, tbh. I'd be fine with having a couple really open relationships, or just having friends with benefits. Anything more serious just seems to reek of "we're taking this more seriously than we really need to". :\

I've only told one close friend about this, but she's cool with just about every weird thing I tell her about myself. A few people have told me I give the impression of being asexual or "not interested in anyone", though. Probably because I don't really talk much about what I find hot.

Mike the Foxhog said:

They were probably mistaking mitosis with the ability to grow back into a whole starfish if you chop it up or something. Which would be equally cool.

Click to expand...

As far as I could tell, yeah. "Yes, I'm asexual, if you chop off my arm it will make a copy of myself. I'm working on repopulating the world with mini-mes."

Jessie said:

You could always be a shark! They make baby clones of themselves if there aren't any boy sharks :>

Click to expand...

Hah! I am using this next time someone asks. Brilliant, brilliant, brilliant.

Stormecho said:

I once told a few classmates that I was ace, and was promptly told that meant I could split myself, that I was wrong, and that I needed to meet a hot guy and all my perceptions would change in a flash!

Click to expand...

Heh, sounds like my high school. Although one girl, through her open-mindedness/snarkyness, was convinced I needed to meet a hot woman and I'd couple up. Major props for not folding to pressure, though. And for the hilarious comeback :D

Music Dragon said:

Certain people seem to equate bisexuality with nymphomania. That might be it?

Click to expand...

I'd bet that. And, probably a factor in why many people prefer to be called pan than bi.

Spaekle said:

Oh yay, asexuality/aromanticism discussion. As I've said before, I'm in an odd situation where I'm pretty sure I'm aromantic but also pretty sure I'm not asexual. Which is apparently unheard of because all aromantic people are asexual too, or something.

Click to expand...

Yeah, that's a common assumption, though due to the rarity of aces in general, and the assumption that aces are so due to trauma/repression/lack of hormones/not meeting the "right person," I can see why. Generally, regardless aromanicism or asexuality, the bits still work, and still like to be stimulated, which for some reason shocks some people.

I cannot understand asexuality/aromanticism (I know what it is, but I really... can't understand being that way). I've just realised how difficult it must be for you guys, with the media and everything. :c

I guess I'm going to be the asshole and say that I don't see why asexuality/aromanticism is a big deal.

it's unfortunate that some might feel alienated due to widespread romanticism but that's mostly because romanticism is supposed to be normal, and for a biological/evolutionary reason, as far as I'm informed.

'normal' is a stupid word, but I basically mean widespread among individuals of the species.

it's hard to express myself on this without coming off as a bigot or something, which is bad because I don't give a fuck whether you are asexual or hetero or homo or bi or pan or whatever.

another note, people need to learn to distinguish between 'bi' and 'pan' better.

it is to my knowledge that pansexuals are viewed even more harshly than bisexuals due to misunderstanding, and for that matter pansexuals and bisexuals are way different than people seem to make them out, in my opinion.

in my mind, pansexual reads 'I am likely to be sexually interested in a person in spite of and not because of their sex or gender identity', while bisexual reads 'I am likely to be sexually interested in a person that is male, and I am likely to be sexually interested in a person that is female' (and I mean that as in m/f sex, not gender). it is for this reason I don't think anyone who is attracted to someone who is third-gender should identify as bisexual.

sexuality labels are lame and cumbersome anyway, and should really only be used for convenience when a more detailed explanation can't be given.

I really don't understand why you need to call yourself "pansexual"... "bisexual" tells people everything they want to know and "pansexual" I think carries more of a stigma (the very first thing that comes to my mind when someone says bisexual is the singer of mcr, the very first thing that comes to my mind when someone says pansexual is one of those satanist ritual-orgies). but do what you have to do i guess.