Pansexuality

[dolly milk]

silverbird6

ill agree that if you like any part of a man or woman, as a pansexual, that you're being a hypocrit
that being said, if you'll date a 500lb obese rolly-poly (or just someone who's butt-ugly) for "who they are" then you're truely a pansexual
as material as i am, i think that pansexuality is really really stupid.....
BUT there are some people out there that say "i dont care how you look, i like you for who you are"
whether or not they're lying....well, next time someone says that to you send them the ugliest picture you can find and see how many are actually lying to themselves, as well as you

What the ******** does pansexuality have to do with somebody's appearance?
That's like saying somebody isn't straight until they're willing to date/have sexual relations with ALL of the opposite gender, not just the ones that they find attractive.

You've got a seriously twisted definition on what pansexuality is. rolleyes

[dolly milk]

Rather than asking the question of what pansexuality really is, why don't we move on to a more important question:

Why are all you people so horrendously dumb?

[silverbird6]

dolly milk

silverbird6

ill agree that if you like any part of a man or woman, as a pansexual, that you're being a hypocrit
that being said, if you'll date a 500lb obese rolly-poly (or just someone who's butt-ugly) for "who they are" then you're truely a pansexual
as material as i am, i think that pansexuality is really really stupid.....
BUT there are some people out there that say "i dont care how you look, i like you for who you are"
whether or not they're lying....well, next time someone says that to you send them the ugliest picture you can find and see how many are actually lying to themselves, as well as you

What the ******** does pansexuality have to do with somebody's appearance?
That's like saying somebody isn't straight until they're willing to date/have sexual relations with ALL of the opposite gender, not just the ones that they find attractive.

You've got a seriously twisted definition on what pansexuality is. rolleyes

Those are extreme examples, but thats what pansexuality bases itself on, no? "liking a person for who they are, not what they are?"

[dolly milk]

Mister George Kapland

frozen_water

HMS Thunder Child

frozen_water

Pansexual seems to be more about a statement than a sexuality.

[Skeptical]

Anything that's different from the norm is usually said to be.

That does not mean it is.

If I'm bisexual I like both genders, If I pansexual I like both genders, but don't want to recognize them as respectively different genders and instead want to assert my attraction is not based on such labels.

Really they like the same thing, one just wants to separated so that their "sexuality" is not defined by attraction to any gender. Hence the statement thing.

If your pansexual you like both genders, animals, aliens, cartoons, trannies, and everything else under the sun


Goddamn, how hard is that to understand? They like everything, because they don't have a sexual preference besides "everything"
Bisexuals like typical males, typical females. That's all.

Why don't you try answering your own question? You clearly don't know the proper definition of the word either.

We aren't interested in animals, that's beastiality. We aren't sexually attracted to pans either. Pansexuality has nothing to do with different species, we are interested in humans, we just don't care whether you're transgendered, cisgendered, agendered, hermaphrodite, etc.

Bisexuality is limited to cisgendered people. Pansexuality shows an interest in all people, regardless of gender.

[dolly milk]

silverbird6

dolly milk

silverbird6

ill agree that if you like any part of a man or woman, as a pansexual, that you're being a hypocrit
that being said, if you'll date a 500lb obese rolly-poly (or just someone who's butt-ugly) for "who they are" then you're truely a pansexual
as material as i am, i think that pansexuality is really really stupid.....
BUT there are some people out there that say "i dont care how you look, i like you for who you are"
whether or not they're lying....well, next time someone says that to you send them the ugliest picture you can find and see how many are actually lying to themselves, as well as you

What the ******** does pansexuality have to do with somebody's appearance?
That's like saying somebody isn't straight until they're willing to date/have sexual relations with ALL of the opposite gender, not just the ones that they find attractive.

You've got a seriously twisted definition on what pansexuality is. rolleyes

Those are extreme examples, but thats what pansexuality bases itself on, no? "liking a person for who they are, not what they are?"

WHAT they are is in regards to what GENDER they are, not their personality or appearance. We do not care what kind of genitals you have, or what kind of genitals you used to have. It's a very simple concept.

[silverbird6]

dolly milk

silverbird6

dolly milk

silverbird6

ill agree that if you like any part of a man or woman, as a pansexual, that you're being a hypocrit
that being said, if you'll date a 500lb obese rolly-poly (or just someone who's butt-ugly) for "who they are" then you're truely a pansexual
as material as i am, i think that pansexuality is really really stupid.....
BUT there are some people out there that say "i dont care how you look, i like you for who you are"
whether or not they're lying....well, next time someone says that to you send them the ugliest picture you can find and see how many are actually lying to themselves, as well as you

What the ******** does pansexuality have to do with somebody's appearance?
That's like saying somebody isn't straight until they're willing to date/have sexual relations with ALL of the opposite gender, not just the ones that they find attractive.

You've got a seriously twisted definition on what pansexuality is. rolleyes

Those are extreme examples, but thats what pansexuality bases itself on, no? "liking a person for who they are, not what they are?"

WHAT they are is in regards to what GENDER they are, not their personality or appearance. We do not care what kind of genitals you have, or what kind of genitals you used to have. It's a very simple concept.

if you didn't care about what gender someone is/was, then why would you have a pro-gender changing stance? if gender doesn't matter to you, why would you change it?
Personality and appearance are very much affected by gender; besides body parts, men are more aggressive than women due to hormones, etc. etc.
You'd have to truly ignore the difference between a man and a woman to consider yourself pansexual, even though you probably would prefer one more than the other based on very general, gender-induced differences

edit: grammar x.x

[dolly milk]

silverbird6

if you didn't care about what gender someone is/was, then why would you have a pro-gender changing stance? if gender doesn't matter to you, why would you change it?
Personality and appearance are very much affected by gender; besides body parts, men are more aggressive than women due to hormones, etc. etc.
You'd have to truly ignore the difference between a man and a woman to consider yourself pansexual, even though you probably would prefer one more than the other based on very general, gender-induced differences

edit: grammar x.x

Pro-gender changing stance? What are you talking about and where are you getting this from?

All I'm saying is that just because we're pansexual doesn't mean we're going to date you if we aren't attracted to your physical appearance(not including your genitalia, obviously). Now it may be different for certain people, but I'm going to explain this from my own personal standpoint. You can look male, female, androgynous, whatever, but if I think you look ugly, then I would find it very difficult to hold a sexual or physical relationship with you. But yes, it's still possible to simply date someone with no sexual interaction based off of their personality. Yes, we care how you act, yes, we care how you look, but no, we don't care what your genitals are like.

And you can still have a preference of one over the other, pansexuality does NOT mean loving everyone equally, just like it's possible for a bisexual person to prefer males over females, and vice versa.

[silverbird6]

dolly milk

silverbird6

if you didn't care about what gender someone is/was, then why would you have a pro-gender changing stance? if gender doesn't matter to you, why would you change it?
Personality and appearance are very much affected by gender; besides body parts, men are more aggressive than women due to hormones, etc. etc.
You'd have to truly ignore the difference between a man and a woman to consider yourself pansexual, even though you probably would prefer one more than the other based on very general, gender-induced differences

edit: grammar x.x

Pro-gender changing stance? What are you talking about and where are you getting this from?

All I'm saying is that just because we're pansexual doesn't mean we're going to date you if we aren't attracted to your physical appearance(not including your genitalia, obviously). Now it may be different for certain people, but I'm going to explain this from my own personal standpoint. You can look male, female, androgynous, whatever, but if I think you look ugly, then I would find it very difficult to hold a sexual or physical relationship with you. But yes, it's still possible to simply date someone with no sexual interaction based off of their personality. Yes, we care how you act, yes, we care how you look, but no, we don't care what your genitals are like.

And you can still have a preference of one over the other, pansexuality does NOT mean loving everyone equally, just like it's possible for a bisexual person to prefer males over females, and vice versa.

"pansexuality does NOT mean loving everyone equally, just like it's possible for a bisexual person to prefer males over females"
so if the point of pansexuality ISN'T to love men or women equally based entirely on their personality, not their body, then what is it?
you saying that pansexualists can like men or women better, just like bisexual people, totally derails the entire point of pansexualism: loving people regardless of gender
if you love men more than women, or vice versa, then you aren't pansexual, because you like one gender more than the other, no matter what the reason

[dolly milk]

silverbird6

"pansexuality does NOT mean loving everyone equally, just like it's possible for a bisexual person to prefer males over females"
so if the point of pansexuality ISN'T to love men or women equally based entirely on their personality, not their body, then what is it?
you saying that pansexualists can like men or women better, just like bisexual people, totally derails the entire point of pansexualism: loving people regardless of gender
if you love men more than women, or vice versa, then you aren't pansexual, because you like one gender more than the other, no matter what the reason

Just because you can prefer something over the other does not mean we are no longer tolerant of the one we prefer less. Are bisexual people not bisexual because they prefer one gender over the other? They would RATHER (for example) have sex with a male over a female, but they are still willing to have sex with females regardless. Why is this so difficult for you to comprehend?

I prefer to eat pizza over icecream. Does that mean I'm not allowed to like icecream anymore, just because I like pizza better than icecream? Seriously, listen to yourself.

[R o b o M a n t i x]

Really, it's s**t like this that makes me shy away from any interaction with the LBGT community as a whole.
It's like people take things too SERIOUSLY there. Too much of "THIS LABEL IS FAKING IT" going on.

Yeah, I consider myself pansexual, but you know what? IDGAF.
When someone asks me what my sexuality is, I don't say "I'm pansexual",
I leave it at "I'm down with anything really."
And when I say 'anything', I mean ANYTHING.
Most Bi-sexuals are NOT cool with anything.
Trans? NOPE
M->F? NOPE
F->M? NOPE
Cis? NOPE
See the difference now?

goddamn, this is why labels do more harm than good. -_____-

[silverbird6]

dolly milk

silverbird6

"pansexuality does NOT mean loving everyone equally, just like it's possible for a bisexual person to prefer males over females"
so if the point of pansexuality ISN'T to love men or women equally based entirely on their personality, not their body, then what is it?
you saying that pansexualists can like men or women better, just like bisexual people, totally derails the entire point of pansexualism: loving people regardless of gender
if you love men more than women, or vice versa, then you aren't pansexual, because you like one gender more than the other, no matter what the reason

Just because you can prefer something over the other does not mean we are no longer tolerant of the one we prefer less. Are bisexual people not bisexual because they prefer one gender over the other? They would RATHER (for example) have sex with a male over a female, but they are still willing to have sex with females regardless. Why is this so difficult for you to comprehend?

I prefer to eat pizza over icecream. Does that mean I'm not allowed to like icecream anymore, just because I like pizza better than icecream? Seriously, listen to yourself.

ive been bisexual for years, and ive learned that i consider myself around 70-30, with a preference to women =P
bisexual people are hardly EVER 50-50, wheras pansexuals, by definition ("regardless of gender" wink would HAVE to be 50-50
its almost impossible to like men and women entirely equally, whether you know it or not, since women and men have slightly different personalities

[dolly milk]

silverbird6

ive been bisexual for years, and ive learned that i consider myself around 70-30, with a preference to women =P
bisexual people are hardly EVER 50-50, wheras pansexuals, by definition ("regardless of gender" wink would HAVE to be 50-50
its almost impossible to like men and women entirely equally, whether you know it or not, since women and men have slightly different personalities

Can you not read? I literally just said that it is not appearance based, and you just further proved my point by admitting it isn't possible to love each gender equally, because that ISN'T what pansexuality means. Just because we don't want to have sex with butterface does not make us any less pansexual. Why, just because bisexual is "easier" because it's only limited to a small number of 2 types of people, means that liking one more than the other is acceptable in that sexuality? It is extremely unfair and you're making yourself sound very prejudice.

Why are you more interested in women? Is it because you prefer the appearance of a woman? Or is it because you just like vaginas better? Bisexuality is limited to WOMEN who have VAGINAS, and MEN who have PENISES. When you are pansexual, you can look like a man on the outside, and have a v****a underneath; we wouldn't care. You could look like a women on the outside, and have a p***s underneath; we wouldn't care. You could look like a man/woman and have BOTH a p***s and a v****a underneath; we STILL wouldn't care.

[silverbird6]

dolly milk

silverbird6

ive been bisexual for years, and ive learned that i consider myself around 70-30, with a preference to women =P
bisexual people are hardly EVER 50-50, wheras pansexuals, by definition ("regardless of gender" wink would HAVE to be 50-50
its almost impossible to like men and women entirely equally, whether you know it or not, since women and men have slightly different personalities

Can you not read? I literally just said that it is not appearance based, and you just further proved my point by admitting it isn't possible to love each gender equally, because that ISN'T what pansexuality means. Just because we don't want to have sex with butterface does not make us any less pansexual. Why, just because bisexual is "easier" because it's only limited to a small number of 2 types of people, means that liking one more than the other is acceptable in that sexuality? It is extremely unfair and you're making yourself sound very prejudice.

Why are you more interested in women? Is it because you prefer the appearance of a woman? Or is it because you just like vaginas better? Bisexuality is limited to WOMEN who have VAGINAS, and MEN who have PENISES. When you are pansexual, you can look like a man on the outside, and have a v****a underneath; we wouldn't care. You could look like a women on the outside, and have a p***s underneath; we wouldn't care. You could look like a man/woman and have BOTH a p***s and a v****a underneath; we STILL wouldn't care.

can you not read? I literally just said that men and women have biological (chemical, only physical in the sense of hormones, nothing to do with penors or vagoos, although the scrotum of men does produce male hormones which affect how they act) differences that affect their personalities, and based on your preference of personality you would, in general, like men OR women better, even if you couldn't care less about appearances. That would, in turn, debunk the definition of pansexuals, unless you hardly cared about who you dated at all.

and besides, i like women more because of how they act, it has nothing about penors or vagoos >w<

[dolly milk]

silverbird6

can you not read? I literally just said that men and women have biological (chemical, only physical in the sense of hormones, nothing to do with penors or vagoos, although the scrotum of men does produce male hormones which affect how they act) differences that affect their personalities, and based on your preference of personality you would, in general, like men OR women better, even if you couldn't care less about appearances. That would, in turn, debunk the definition of pansexuals, unless you hardly cared about who you dated at all.

and besides, i like women more because of how they act, it has nothing about penors or vagoos >w<

Oh really now? Then why don't you explain transgendered people? People who born into the body of [x] gender but have the personality of [y] gender? Your argument is irrelevant and has already proven to be a logical fallacy. Let's use straight people for example. A straight man is buddies with another man because they get along together due to personalities. Now imagine his male friend was turned into an attractive female according to his preference, yet still had the same personality of his male friend. Men b***h a lot about their girlfriends being whiney and PMSing all the time, and wish they were more "chill", no? I hear it quite often.

Like I already said, your "definition" on pansexuality is horribly twisted and wrong, I'll repeat myself for the third time now, it has nothing to do with loving each gender exactly equally. It simply means that we are tolerant of all genders. "Regardless of gender" means that we will not turn you down just because you identify as a certain gender, despite being more attracted to one than the other. A bisexual person might be more attracted to males. That does not mean they're going to downright refuse being with females, because then that would make them straight. The same thing goes for pansexuals. It's all about context, my friend.

[silverbird6]

dolly milk

silverbird6

can you not read? I literally just said that men and women have biological (chemical, only physical in the sense of hormones, nothing to do with penors or vagoos, although the scrotum of men does produce male hormones which affect how they act) differences that affect their personalities, and based on your preference of personality you would, in general, like men OR women better, even if you couldn't care less about appearances. That would, in turn, debunk the definition of pansexuals, unless you hardly cared about who you dated at all.

and besides, i like women more because of how they act, it has nothing about penors or vagoos >w<

Oh really now? Then why don't you explain transgendered people? People who born into the body of [x] gender but have the personality of [y] gender? Your argument is irrelevant and has already proven to be a logical fallacy. Let's use straight people for example. A straight man is buddies with another man because they get along together due to personalities. Now imagine his male friend was turned into an attractive female according to his preference, yet still had the same personality of his male friend. Men b***h a lot about their girlfriends being whiney and PMSing all the time, and wish they were more "chill", no? I hear it quite often.

Like I already said, your "definition" on pansexuality is horribly twisted and wrong, I'll repeat myself for the third time now, it has nothing to do with loving each gender exactly equally. It simply means that we are tolerant of all genders. "Regardless of gender" means that we will not turn you down just because you identify as a certain gender, despite being more attracted to one than the other. A bisexual person might be more attracted to males. That does not mean they're going to downright refuse being with females, because then that would make them straight. The same thing goes for pansexuals. It's all about context, my friend.

it sounds to me like just another term, for bisexual people who still want to be 'different from the crowd' not that bisexuality is becoming more and more of the norm.
the only context it has any point in is multigendered people (which would still have the hormones of one gender or the other depending on how they're born or altered, mind you) or fairy tail dreams in which men magically become women.
I don't look up to people who go through sex-change operations anyways; sure i probably act more like a girl than a guy, but im not gonna chop off my d**k or turn it inside-out just so i can accept my own gender. I'd still argue that you should just love people for what gender they are, instead of twisting and distorting the body to become multi-gendered, but you probably wouldn't see where I'm coming from (you're pansexual, after all =P)