"And how should I presume?"

The unsophisticated ramblings of an unenlightened twenty-something who hopes to, one day, change the world.


Cast of characters:

The Anna to my Elsa (and tag)
The Michael to my Wendy Darling (and tag)
The Wash to my Zoe (and tag)
The John to my Sherlock
The Keladry to my Alanna
The Mal to my Zoe


This Journal Is QUILTBAG Positive

This Journal Is Sex Work Positive

This Journal Is Body Positive

This Journal Is Positive

Recent Tweets @
Posts I Like
Folks I Follow
Posts tagged "pansexuality"
Hi:) I just found your blog and I love it. Are you pansexual?
bemusedlybespectacled bemusedlybespectacled Said:

Eeeeeeeeeeh.

Tough question.

Technically I am pansexual, in that I cannot conceive of a reason why I should not love or fuck someone because of their gender. Like, I honestly cannot imagine my level of attraction to a person changing because they’re nonbinary or whatever. If I feel attraction towards someone, how could their gender make me not like them? And if it’s about physical appearance and not gender identity, honestly, I see people sort of like mix and match books: it doesn’t matter what order the different parts are in, it’s all fine.

But, I like the word bisexual. It just fits me better. It feels right to me in a way pansexual doesn’t, for a lot of reasons. So, I ID as bi because that’s what I am. And to me, “bisexual” can mean “at least two” or “more than two” or “my gender and not my gender,” so it’s still me.

Asker Anonymous Asks:
What is pansexual?
bemusedlybespectacled bemusedlybespectacled Said:

It means that you’re a person who has the capacity to be sexually (and usually romantically, though not always) attracted to people of all genders. That means men, women, nonbinary people, agender people, EVERYTHING.

theblutomato:

this-is-the-kairos:

hope this will clear the confusion.

this is important

(via bemymarauder)

shiboodots:

If you thought the Bisexual Obstacle Course was tough, you should see Pan’s Labyrinth

(via gwenstaciest)

Asker tsundeanre Asks:
I'm worried this new woman is just going to be another love interest that is 2D and bland. :/ I'd rather it be fuck and move on and her being developed (though that would be hoping for too much at this point).
bemusedlybespectacled bemusedlybespectacled Said:

kate-wisehart:

I’d hope that’s not the case and that they don’t fuck it up. However, this is SPN, so I don’t have high hopes, although NGL I’m always down for more ladies. 

The fact remains, though, that if one were rooting for Cas to be pansexual, this doesn’t negate that in the slightest.

And I feel very, very angry at the people who act like it does. Yeah, it sucks for representation’s sake, but knowing SPN they’ll fridge this chick pretty early on anyway - which isn’t GOOD, OH MY GOD I’D RATHER HER STICK AROUND AND BE AWESOME - which leaves the door open for Cas to perhaps wind up with a dude, and then maybe another chick, and perhaps a non-gender-conforming person.

Not that any of that will likely happen, but by claiming that Cas being in a straight-appearing relationship/thing/whatever that somehow negates potential pansexuality, people are very literally claiming that by falling in love with my husband I am somehow straight and not pansexual.

Which isn’t okay, and is actually REALLY FUCKING PAINFUL. My sexuality isn’t the entirety of my personality, but it’s a pretty huge chunk of it. I get enough shit at Pride for who I fell in love with - like I can fucking control that, Jesus Christ - I don’t need it from my fandom, too.

People seem to think that bi/pansexuality is the same thing as being gay. Which. No. It isn’t.

kate-wisehart:

I’ve seen at least one person talking about how they are upset that Castiel’s romantic interest is female or female-appearing.

Because they wanted him to be pansexual.

Cas being interested in a woman doesn’t

make

him

not 

pan

obstinatecondolement:

bialogue-group:

commanderabutt:

theloserestloserwhoeverlost:

"There’s no such thing as bisexual. You’re either gay, straight, or pansexual."


That’s a new one.

what the sweet baby fuck who would say that

Someone who works for HRC or some other arm of Gay Inc. or in the Queer Studies Department in some University and is hysterically trying to make sure that the Bisexual/Non-Monosexual Community is NOT given it’s fair share of grant-funding, programs, jobs etc. becasue that would mean less for the Gay White Men who run everything. And to quote the Bisexual Resource Center:

Pitting Minorities Against Each Other: The sad fact is these allegations of binarism draw not from actual transphobia within bisexual communities or bi-identified people, but from a long history of biphobia within parts of the gay and lesbian movements.

Claims of bisexuality as an "oppressive identity" are not new. We used to (and still) hear that bisexuals are a "privileged group" perpetuating heteronormativity and oppressing gay and lesbian people. Yet now we hear that bisexuals are a privileged group perpetuating cisgender** normativity and oppressing transgender and genderqueer people.

Both are demonstrably incorrect. An oppressing class/system will often point to the groups it seeks to marginalize and demonize and claim that they are in fact the ones who are the force of oppression and evil. It’s a classic maneuver, and it couldn’t be more false.

Trans people have suffered from very similar allegations from gays and lesbians. Male to female (MTF) trans people have been accused of merely escaping from one stereotype to another rather than advocating true gender freedom. Meanwhile, female to male (FTM) trans people have been accused of being opportunistic seekers of male privilege. Boy, we just can’t win, can we?

The “Bisexual = Binary” argument pits these minorities-within-the-minority against the other, compelling us to compete for a place in the gay and lesbian movement. In this way, the movement can stop worrying about how to prevent bi and trans communities from threatening their positions of power. Setting us against one another makes sure that we’ll do that job for them.”

(via bisexual-community)

snarkengaged:

I’m gonna need for pansexuals to stop shooting across the fucking bow at bisexuals and pretending they’re somehow more inclusive than us when the “we accept trans* more than you” bullshit is, itself, often belittling to the trans*men and women it claims we dehumanize (newsflash: I care more about asexual and trans*individuals for the straight out erasure they face more than I do with the G, L, or P part of any non-heterosexual moniker). I understand the idea that they “reject the gender binary” and thus, are attracted to people who don’t identify with one gender or the other. That’s fine, although it could open up a discussion about how much sexuality is not only about what the other individual identifies as, but also about what your sexuality is based on perceived characteristics in the individuals you’re attracted to BUT I DIGRESS. It’s often framed as including trans* individuals in that same group as “non-binary”, which is flat out bullshit, because a trans* individual is the gender they identify with. It’s fucking infuriating.

I’m not saying there aren’t troubles within the bisexual community. I’m not saying the pansexual community is, in any way, bad. But it seems like I’ve see a lot of shots fired recently from one direction and about one thing, and I needed to get that off my chest.

I sometimes feel that these alternative labels function like code words in queer women’s communities, as if to say, “I am sexual with everyone *except* cisgender men.” While people are certainly free to choose not to partner with cisgender men, I am disturbed by the binary that seems to be developing here, one in which pansexual/polysexual/etc.-identified women are supposedly subversive and queer because they refuse to sleep with cisgender men, whereas bisexual-identified women are supposedly conservative and straight-minded because they do sometimes partner with cisgender men. And it seems to me that the bisexual-reinforces-the-binary trope exacerbates this binary, which is probably why this accusation has become so prevalent in queer women’s communities.

Julia Serano in her latest blog entry

DEAR GOD THIS SO HARD. Pan as code for “I sleep with everyone but cis men! Look how queer I am! LOVE ME MOAR!! Those bi’s are traitors and not queer enough ewwwwwww”

(via nooffswitch)

Oh. Hello there.

(via ro-s-aspa-rks)

I’m reblogging this as something for the to mentally chew on.  I’m bisexual, I’ve read a lot of criticism of the term pansexual because people tend to other or third gender trans* people when they use it.   Most recently I’ve seen pansexual defined as attracted to personalities not bodies.  Which is just so fucking smug and annoying. 

It is like poly people claiming they are more mature because they never get jealous.  Saying you never get jealous is an obviously a lie, jealousy is a human emotion everyone feels it.  How you respond to being jealous is the indicator of how mature you are, not how many partners you have.

(via pickywithshoes)

Reblogging for pickywithshoes commentary

(via nooffswitch)

Seconding the criticisms I’ve seen of pansexuality being used to other/third gender trans* people - I see the “men, women, and trans people” definition a lot and it bugs the shit out of me. So does the “personalities not parts” one.

I also know that people who ID as pan sometimes get criticized for dating/having sex with cis men, same as bi women do, because it’s “not queer enough,” but I get the sense that it’s not as prevalent for whatever reason, maybe because pan people are perceived as never dating cis men ever because they’re thought to have more options than bi people, because of the misconception that bi people only date cis people?

I do have to say that I do dislike my-sexuality-is-better-than-yours pansexual people. While there are very lovely pan people who don’t define their orientation in problematic ways, and I definitely think people who aren’t monosexual should address monosexism in the queer and straight communities together, it can be sort of difficult when there’s this friction. And by “friction” I mean “stop making your definition of your orientation a critique of my orientation" and "so you think I do choose people for parts? that’s obnoxious.

(via polarink)

victorian-snow-doll:

Top Flag: Pansexuality Bottom Flag: Bisexuality

Spread the love.

I would kill for T-shirts with these designs. SO PRETTY.

(via morphopopsicles-deactivated2014)

kelsilove:

twerknugget:

oh my fucking god ahahahhaa

That would be pansexual, not bisexual.

Please don’t bash bisexuality in your definition of pansexual. Some bi people fit that description exactly and saying that they’re defining themselves wrong is not cool.

(via youarenothingsignificant)

asspiringdictionary:

You do not get to say that they’re just people trying to be “different”. You do not get to say “they’re all the same anyway” and refer to someone by a label that does not fit them. You do not get to say that these sexualities do not exist.

We clear?

Tacking on to that: no identity is better or worse than another one. Pansexuals should stop calling bisexuals transphobes and binarists and bisexuals should stop calling pansexuals special snowflakes. Capisce?

Do not use your definition of your orientation to define someone else’s orientation.

I’m sorry, I’ll say that again for emphasis.

Do not use your definition of your orientation to define someone else’s orientation.

Some bi people have different definitions of bisexual that are not as this describes. These kinds of posts ignore those people. Please don’t do that; it is not OK.

(via merlinsbed)

fuckyeahsexpositivity:

OK SO.

Because we cracked +2000 followers, and because it’s Queer History Month, and because I love knitting, I am doing a giveaway!

What will you win?

Well, let’s see.

We’ve got a beautiful BI PRIDE HAT!

We’ve got a perfect PAN PRIDE HAT!

We’ve got an awesome ACE PRIDE HAT!

And we have a ter-fucking-rific TRANS PRIDE HAT! (This hat is not finished yet but will be finished by the time I need to send stuff places. Walmart ran out of blue yarn.)

These are 100% handknit by me, using acrylic yarn (with the exception of the ace pride hat, which has purple wool for the brim). They are lovely and sturdy and I can wear them on my head and I have a very large head so they are ONE SIZE FITS ALL and ANYONE CAN WEAR THEM IF THEY WANT.

Now, we need to set some ground rules:

  • You will go to this link. You put in your URL and you pick ONE choice (sorry, people who are both trans* and something else or pansexual aromantic or whatever, you get ONE HAT. That’s it.).
  • You leave your ask box open (to signed asks, at the very least) so that I can tell you that you won and you can tell me where to send your prize.
  • You can reblog this as many times as you desire, but it will not affect your chances of winning.
  • You may enter as many times as you desire, but don’t give yourself copy-pasting carpal tunnel, yeah?
  • Here’s the thing about followers: I’m going to pick two winners for each hat. If both are followers, or neither are followers, then I flip a coin. If one is a follower and the other isn’t, then priority goes the follower because this is partially about how lovely our followers are. So you CAN win if you don’t follow us, but it would be very nice if you followed us anyway.
  • The giveaway ends NOVEMBER 30th, just in time to get yourself an early holiday gift and keep yourself warm in the winter.

OK, followers, let’s do this thing!

—BB