Rainbow Ramblings! (LGBTQ[AEIOUsometimesY]** Thread)

[Alzar]

The difference between pansexual and bisexual can get pretty ambiguous at times, since the communities often overlap and people sometimes have different definitions for them. For example, some people define bisexual as "two or more genders" while pansexual is sometimes taken to mean as "regardless of gender".

Generally though, bisexual is the older term, while pansexual is newer and usually used out of respect that in this day and age, alternative nonbinary gender identities are more common.

There are a lot of people who argue since different people hold different beliefs and viewpoints, so I generally try to generalise it into something as general as possible, since I'm kind of sex-repulsed and the whole issue doesn't really concern me anyway.

[Alicitzen]

bisexual as "two or more genders"

Spoiler:
Pictured: A bicycle

[Alzar]

is that you

[MashFlob]

What if sex is irrelevant to these people?

sex as in the physical activty? that's not related to your sexual orientation.
If you mean sex as in the gender: then he is bi-sexual.

I don't strictly accept that sexual orientation is only meant to predict the sex of your partner with X% accuracy and Y% margin of error- which would basically be the end result, I find, if we suggest the "to who you can get attracted to" assertion. If you change your viewpoint to the "how you get attracted", on the other hand, this may be far more relevant in the topic of dating someone you may or may not wind up having feelings for.

If you change the definition of sexual orientation to subjective preferences of characteristics then you just move away from biology and science. So why would you want to change the definition?

> 1. They do not care if their partner is of the same or opposite sex AND also do not care if the person is genderqueer, agendered, or otherwise

no idea where to put the agender but how does bi-sexuality exclude you from liking genderqueer people? After all there are two genders, so with bi-sexuality you cover them both. I get the nuance somewhat. Pansexual specifically also includes transgender people, but technically it covers the exact same as bisexual so I'm not sure where the need for that word is. I think it does more harm than good, but maybe Alzar is right and it's just a modern version of bisexual.

2. In the case of demisexuals, they may generally find themselves with little to NO attraction to sex/gender... in the absence of any connection to people

So they just have little to no sex drive, that doesn't say anything about their sexual orientation. After all most people need some sort of emotional bond in order to be attracted to somebody, unless you are horny as fuck.
That's just how it is with human beings and our ability for empathy.

To be a bit less politically correct, from I've come to understand in discussions, A Bisexual is someone who enjoys high sexual activity but does find themselves with varying degrees of attraction to both core sexes. The attraction could be equal, it may also swing one way more than the other due to a stronger preference to one of the two core sexes.

what the fuck, in what way is your sexual activity related to your sexual orientation?

So, just to top this off, if you really want to limit your viewpoint to the sex/gender of someone's potential partners, then sure- typically anyone who identifies strictly heterosexual only would not be married to the same sex, and anyone who identifies strictly homosexual only would not be married to the opposite sex.

I have no clue what point you are trying to make here



I don't know. I can't help myself but to think that a lot of your points are redundant, not related to the actual topic of sexual orientation, or just plain out wrong.

[Alzar]

A lot of people have their own opinions on it, but really, bisexual and pansexual are really similar in terms of both community and definition. Bisexual has a stronger history attached to it, while pansexual is more getting rid of the connotations of the bi- prefix and is associated with the more modern movements. It's really up to the person for how to define it to them personally, but it all really boils down to swinging in more than one direction to some extent.

More confusing is biweekly. Does it mean twice every week, or once every two weeks?

[JazzMusicStops]

More confusing is biweekly. Does it mean twice every week, or once every two weeks?

Once every 2 weeks I think, because biannual plants take 2 years to grow, wither and die

[Alzar]

what the fuck

[JazzMusicStops]

what the fuck

O

[Alicitzen]

is that you

Listen.
I am a trysexual
In that I will try and sex u all.
Providing you are female.

[Alzar]

o-oh

[Rickdaily12]

sex as in the physical activty? that's not related to your sexual orientation.
If you mean sex as in the gender: then he is bi-sexual.

No, see, in that case, I may need to explain some terms more in line with the LGBT community then. See sex/gender distinction.

Sex is the physical attribute of the body. What most commonly happens is if a person has a XY pair, has a penis, produces testosterone more than estrogen, produces semen, etc, then your sex is Male. If XX, with a vagina, produces estrogen rather than eggs, etc, then your sex is Female. (Some people born with genetic irregularities don't match this definition, these are just examples of how sex is the physical body.)

Gender is how one identifies. It is strongly influenced by society and how men and women are expected to act, dress, and live on their lives with everyone else. Normally, if the person's sex matches their intended gender, we call them cisgender. If not, then normally we call them Transgender, or if they state that their gender is not male, female, or somewhere in between, then we call them either agender, or genderqueer.

The problem is that you're trying to oversimplify. You are trying to put everyone into three boxes, and a lot of the people you're trying to generalize are correctly asserting that the umbrella-term you're applying does not apply to them. The fact that you are trying to tell them what is going on with them when they feel you are missing how they feel is offensive to them, and most importantly, is not what this thread is for.

Statements like this:

If you change the definition of sexual orientation to subjective preferences of characteristics then you just move away from biology and science.

no idea where to put the agender but how does bi-sexuality exclude you from liking genderqueer people? After all there are two genders,

but technically it covers the exact same as bisexual so I'm not sure where the need for that word is. I think it does more harm than good,

flat out misses THIS:

The fact that you are trying to tell them what is going on with them when they feel you are missing how they feel is offensive to them, and most importantly, is not what this thread is for.

One more thing.

If you change the definition of sexual orientation to subjective preferences of characteristics-

Stop. Stop right there.
That is exactly what people do here. That is exactly how people communicate here.

It has everything to do with them. It has nothing to do with objective observations. It IS subjective, it IS heavily based on how the person feels within themselves. So no, trying to apply biology and science to how one feels about themselves, especially here, is likely to step on toes.

Also, please, MashFlob, I don't mind having a discussion about this if you don't understand and you want to ask more questions about this, but please try to use a more respectful vocabulary if you get lost or stuck somewhere.

[Alzar]

The sex/gender thing is a lot of ? ? ? sometimes, especially for people who are physically intersex or have weird body things going on for them. Just going to throw that in here, for relevance.

[parkerparkour]

Rick you missed the most important one, attack helicopter kin. Although with all the rad new transtrender phrases attack-helicopters are looking like a good alternative right now.

Really it doesn't matter, bi, pan, both boil down to the same thing, ones just more snowflakes than the other. These are minutes of my life I will never get back.

[Rickdaily12]

On another new topic, I had a fun followup appointment with my doctor today...

I was supposed to meet with him about my foot surgery, but when I told him that I I felt feeling tired and a bit sore around my hips and lower area, the topic went to sex really freaking quickly.... I was doing a lot of cuddling with my boyfriend recently now that I'm able to go out a lot more, and I guess we might have cuddled each other a little too hard if I'm still sore.

And somehow the topic of Bisexuality came up... apparently my doctor learned for the first time ever that it's not only women who can be bi. He really seemed to think that men swing firm one way or the other- which is odd, because I thought I remembered telling him my orientation before, lol.

Anyway, he seemed really surprised. It's funny, because he does think that males seem more than fine about being sexually active and adventurous. I wonder why it seemed hard before to grasp that a male wouldn't be against sleeping with both sexes?

I was in there about 10 minutes longer than he was expecting... we were ignoring the basis of the follow-up for quite some time, lol.


P-Edit: Parker, what? o_o

[alouvre]

I'll have to disagree with anybody who says bisexuality and pansexuality are inherently different, because the core concept is, to me, the same. One label is simply more inclusive than the other, and that's it. I have never seen a bisexual person say that they are not attracted to non-binary people.

Rick is more qualified to say this, of course, but my two cents on demisexuality is rather simple. Everybody has a pool of people they can be, but not necessarily are, sexually attracted to. In the case of a non-demisexual, this pool will include strangers and friends. In the case of a demisexual, this pool will only include friends. In the case of an asexual, this pool will include nobody. It is not a preference, and a demisexual can be just as sexually oriented as non-demisexuals are.

I think Mash is fine; there doesn't seem to be any intent to hurt. Saying offensive things will be inevitable. People have differing opinions on this sort of thing; sometimes they simply aren't aware of something. It's good to learn more about other point of views, I'd say.

As a side note, I also think the sex/gender argument is rather pointless. If somebody wants you to call her by she/her pronouns, then just call her by she/her pronouns. There's really nothing else that matters, in my opinion.

[Rickdaily12]

Again, to be very politically incorrect, I've personally always viewed pansexuality as like, the base example of what sexual attractions between people should be like. Totally ditch the fixation on sex and gender, that sort of thing. (Even though this isn't how people are... I feel like, in an ideal world, this is what we would be)

I have met a few bisexuals who prefer that term for those given reasons... or the ones who say their preferences tilt, which I suppose are fair enough points to have a distinction at all, but I do also consider pan and bi to be very alike. Pan is definitely the most open, I've found.

There's also the people I've met who just say "I either like it or I don't."

So it's hard to distinguish. =/

[alouvre]

I wonder why it seemed hard before to grasp that a male wouldn't be against sleeping with both sexes?

Not sure where you are, but all the guys here are painfully insecure. They think liking another man is going to hurt their masculinity, whatever that means.

So it's hard to distinguish. =/

Yeah, it is, but it's also hard to be politically correct all the time, so I wouldn't worry about it. You don't have to be politically correct to just be considerate and polite. Besides, political correctness isn't necessarily correct and is rather debatable.

[Alicitzen]

This over worded stuff is one of the reasons why I say who gives a shit, labels suck just fuck whoever you like with what genitalia you like.(or dont fuck anybody if ya like).
Because boy that makes things simple.

[Alzar]

sexuality is so weird, like i think i'm asexual (and have thought so for a while now) because the idea of having sex is COMPLETELY FOREIGN AND DISGUSTING TO ME (this is probably a surprise to many) and heck even kissing is absolutely repulsive as a concept

but heck i'm going to own like 892 dildos when im older, its my life goal

[Alicitzen]

I wonder why it seemed hard before to grasp that a male wouldn't be against sleeping with both sexes?

Not sure where you are, but all the guys here are painfully insecure. They think liking another man is going to hurt their masculinity, whatever that means.

Wouldnt having a dude inside you make you some percentage more dude?
Dude...

[DizzyWaddleDoo]

I personally don't get the point behind differentiating between bisexual and pansexual. I've always seen bisexual as "love whoever you want" anyway, so the extra term has always just seemed redundant to me. I prefer to identify as bisexual just because the word sounds better to me, even if someone more picky about the labels would call it pansexual. If someone does want to differentiate between them though, who am I to stop them?

On another note, I totally want to just casually say something like "Oh have I mentioned I'm bi?" while talking with my friends and see their reactions.

[MashFlob]

The problem is that you're trying to oversimplify. You are trying to put everyone into three boxes, and a lot of the people you're trying to generalize are correctly asserting that the umbrella-term you're applying does not apply to them. The fact that you are trying to tell them what is going on with them when they feel you are missing how they feel is offensive to them, and most importantly, is not what this thread is for.

What more boxes are there? There are two genders, so necessarily there can't be more than 3 combinations. In no way I am telling people how to feel or not, but there is no point in drawing lines between unrelated stuff. such as sexual drive and sexual orientation. That is just confusing.

It has everything to do with them. It has nothing to do with objective observations. It IS subjective, it IS heavily based on how the person feels within themselves. So no, trying to apply biology and science to how one feels about themselves, especially here, is likely to step on toes.

Alright, then if this has nothing to do with biology and science, then why use scientific terms that are already well defined?

That is exactly what people do here. That is exactly how people communicate here.

I wasn't clear there, my bad. Sexual orienation is the subjective preference of sexual characteristics, and not character traits, off which you are talking. Those are the base for an emotional bond.

[Rickdaily12]

What more boxes are there? There are two genders, so necessarily there can't be more than 3 combinations. In no way I am telling people how to feel or not, but there is no point in drawing lines between unrelated stuff. such as sexual drive and sexual orientation. That is just confusing.

The majority of this community already deny basically all of this. It's okay to ask how many boxes they say there are, but the underlined statements here are what they know you're trying to say here.

To them, there is every point to diversify, there is every point to be inclusive, and do away with labels and restrictions. If you don't get why, that's fine, and you can ask for details- but be aware that these are the attitudes that you're bringing into a space that they feel they have to be defensive over.

Alright, then if this has nothing to do with biology and science, then why use scientific terms that are already well defined?

I'm sorry, please don't take this the wrong way- but if you're here in the pursuit of science and discovery, then... when you read the original post of this thread, what on earth gave you the idea that you're in the right place?

Who ever said anything about answering questions according to the basis of the scientific method and with professorial accuracy? That's not what this is. This is a support thread, not a place of research. This is a place where I've already told you that you ask for people's interpretations on things. That screams subjective. I'm going to ask you to reconsider if you're posting in the right place at all, because I think you and I have very different ideas of what a support thread for this community is supposed to look like.

I wasn't clear there, my bad. Sexual orientation is the subjective preference of sexual characteristics, and not character traits, off which you are talking. Those are the base for an emotional bond.

Yes. That is the attitude of most of us who come here.

I haven't even given loose interpretations of prefixes and orientations yet for reasons, you know. Again- are you sure you're in the right place?

[MashFlob]

To them, there is every point to diversify, there is every point to be inclusive, and do away with labels and restrictions. If you don't get why, that's fine, and you can ask for details- but be aware that these are the attitudes that you're bringing into a space that they feel they have to be defensive over.

lol, I'm sure I can handle any attitude I get. After all you seem to be the only one to be offended. The other ones were cool to answer some of mine questions and gave me some valuable insight.

I'm sorry, please don't take this the wrong way- but if you're here in the pursuit of science and discovery, then... when you read the original post of this thread, what on earth gave you the idea that you're in the right place?

I had some questions and got them answered. Then I saw your post which didn't make much sense so I keep asking. How on earth wouldn't a discussion board be NOT the place to talk about that? I'm not forcing you to reply to me. If you feel offended then I can't help that other than tell you to ignore me.

Who ever said anything about answering questions according to the basis of the scientific method and with professorial accuracy? That's not what this is. This is a support thread, not a place of research. This is a place where I've already told you that you ask for people's interpretations on things. That screams subjective. I'm going to ask you to reconsider if you're posting in the right place at all, because I think you and I have very different ideas of what a support thread for this community is supposed to look like.

I didn't say that. But if you use words that are very well defined already and use it in a context where it simply isn't fitting, then it doesn't make much sense. And people who are confused ask questions.

[Rickdaily12]

"these are the attitudes that you're bringing into a space [...]"
Does not mean you'll get attitude, but rather you're bringing a mindset that this thread is trying to not have brought into here in the first place.

I had some questions and got them answered. After all you need to understand things first before you accept them.Then I saw your post which didn't make much sense so I keep asking. How on earth wouldn't a discussion board be NOT the place to talk about that? I'm not forcing you to reply to me. If you feel offended then I can't help that other than tell you to ignore me.

I'm trying as best as I can to help you grasp my take, as well as the takes of people whom I've discussed questions like this before, but I'm realizing that in your case, there seems to be a clash of goals.

I'm trying to give you the subjective interpretations of myself and the people within the community whom this thread is meant to help. You're looking for objective information in terms of science and discovery. Having realized this, I'm not sure how to proceed. I'm not annoyed with you, I'm not saying you aren't welcome here, but I am saying that I don't think that, unless I'm misinterpreting what it is you're looking for in here (which is answers in sync with scientific basis), I don't think you're in the right place.

If you're looking for scientific basis, I'm sure there's plenty of research groups of these topics. That's not what this thread is.