"And how should I presume?"

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?

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

chasing-oblivion:

Go and get a piece of paper. Honestly, do it. Call it an experiment. A piece of A4 is fine

Now. What I would like you to do, is fold it evenly in half. Easy yes?

Do it again.
And again. 3rd time.
And again.
And again. Getting difficult?.
And again.
Once more.

Now, try and fold your piece of paper in half just one more time. What? You can’t do it?

I cannot think of a better analogy to draw parallel to the glorious idiocy that is going in lately in regard to sexual orientation and identity online.

I am a staunch supporter of equal marriage, and this year gave my name to a petition sent to the Scottish parliament, to campaign for legislation that would mark our country as a beacon and a standard in equal rights. I believe that if two people truly love one another, then they have a right to declare that love, take vows to one another for it, and it have equal legal powers, regardless of who the two people are. Two men, two women, one of each, whether one, or both partners are transgender- it really doesn’t matter. Marriage should be for everyone.

Everyone should also have the freedom to be open with their sexuality. One day, I sincerely hope all of the stigma attached to LGBT people will vanish, and it become so accepted that no-one (civilised and sane) ever speaks of it.

Having said that, sexuality is unfortunately becoming more complex by the day. So I’m going to give a sort of “Sexual-orientation Orientation for dummies”

There are, in this world, only male and female human beings. Therefore, it is reasonable to suppose that some will be attracted to each others sex (heterosexual), some will be attracted to the same sex as their own (homosexual) and others still find attraction to both groups (bisexual). With that in mind, would you be surprised that there are people who regard themselves as something else entirely? On the Internet I have also encountered the following, given as a “sexual orientation.”

• Asexuality
• Pansexuality
• Demisexuality

I may actually concede Asexuality as a genuine orientation because there are those put there who are to attracted to- or show no signs of it- to any gender. I have a hard time with it, because it almost seems like self-denial and repression of the basic human nature of sexual desire, but I cannot speak for each and every person’s feelings. I’d be skeptical of anyone who “turned” Asexual though, and be questioning whether it was as a result of a poor relationship and broken trust. I do raise my eyebrow at this “Gray-A” business though, “I’m asexual up to a point” basically. Come off it.

Pansexuality is something I never used to understand too much. My own fiancée identifies as Pan, but to me, because of it’s sentiment that “you have the potential to be attracted to anyone, regardless of their gender” it just seems to me like pan are “bisexual with bells on”, or “very bisexual indeed”. If there only are two sexes, and people choose to live as one or the other, there are only 3 choices really, straight, gay or bi. I suppose it’s to cover the transsexual part of humanity, and to that extend I suppose I can understand that too. It’s one of those “shouldn’t matter but it does” moments, because I’m sure there are men dating and probably married to, people that began their lives on this earth as men. But as they are now living as female, are their partners gay or bi? Not necessarily seems to be the answer, as they may still regard themselves as straight. 

Demisexuality? This is where my line is. Demisexual people identify as only being attracted to people sexually “some of the time.” *cough* Every woman on the face of the earth then? Joking aside, it is specifically highlighted as having sexual attraction only after an emotional connection has been made. To me, that’s just a fancy way of saying you don’t like the idea of one night stands and you want sex you have to be special in an emotional way. There’s nothing wrong with that, or wanting to share sexual experiences only with someone you care about, but it really doesn’t need a label. Seems to serve as a method to draw attention and special treatment for making this choice too. A bout of Special Snowflake Syndrome seems to be at work:

“I identify with it, therefore it is real and if you disagree then you are wrong”

Well, it’s not a sexual orientation, hate to break it to you. It is your mechanism on how you deal with the relationships that you choose to be in, not which partners you choose. 

Demisexuality is a fancy sounding word that doesn’t mean a hell of a lot, and it is convoluted and unnecessary as that piece of paper in front of you. An awkward fact, but true. It is impossible to fold a piece of paper evenly more than seven times, as we have discovered, and fruitless, as you probably can’t use it for anything. The fact that the “wiggly red line” of internet spellcheck rests under it sets alarm bells ringing early. So let’s dispense with what’s unnecessary, and start making sense. 

As well as the three I’ve listed here, there are many other monikers and extensions of romanticism that people have started to make use of, again, many of them don’t amount to very much, and are a product of an attention seeking mentality in my eyes. In an attempt to define every aspect of themselves and their personal feelings- and put it on display- people are creating labels by which they would resent being judged. If it makes you happy, then I don’t have an overwhelming problem with it, as it does me no direct harm. In the end though, reader, you have to ask yourself what I’ve been asking all along during the background-reading before this post.

What’s the point?

Followers, please reblog this, do not like.

OK, you’ve got some serious issues with your logic.

There are, in this world, only male and female human beings.

Nope. Even if we look at it solely from a genitals perspective (that means ignoring gender entirely), intersex people exist. Furthermore, not all intersex people have the same parts as other intersex people, so it doesn’t make any sense to say that there are just “male and female” when you can be male without having a penis as we think of one or female as we think of one.

If there only are two sexes, and people choose to live as one or the other, there are only 3 choices really, straight, gay or bi.

Except there aren’t only two sexes, so that point is invalid.

I suppose it’s to cover the transsexual part of humanity, and to that extend I suppose I can understand that too. It’s one of those “shouldn’t matter but it does” moments, because I’m sure there are men dating and probably married to, people that began their lives on this earth as men. But as they are now living as female, are their partners gay or bi? Not necessarily seems to be the answer, as they may still regard themselves as straight. 

Yes, men who are attracted to women are straight. However, trans* people are more than just male or female. There are male and female trans* people, but there are also trans people who are bigender or agender or a third gender. Hence why pansexuality is a legitimate orientation.

I may actually concede Asexuality as a genuine orientation because there are those put there who are to attracted to- or show no signs of it- to any gender. I have a hard time with it, because it almost seems like self-denial and repression of the basic human nature of sexual desire, but I cannot speak for each and every person’s feelings. I’d be skeptical of anyone who “turned” Asexual though, and be questioning whether it was as a result of a poor relationship and broken trust. I do raise my eyebrow at this “Gray-A” business though, “I’m asexual up to a point” basically. Come off it.

Celibacy is a choice - you are choosing not to have sex for whatever reason. Asexuality is not a choice. Asexual people can also, in some cases, have sexual desire, but have no interest in having sex with someone else. They just masturbate. Novel concept, I know.

To me, that’s just a fancy way of saying you don’t like the idea of one night stands and you want sex you have to be special in an emotional way.

What part of “not a choice” do you not get?

The fact that the “wiggly red line” of internet spellcheck rests under it sets alarm bells ringing early.

Things that my internet spellcheck doesn’t think are words:

• transphobia
• wuthering
• colour

In the end though, reader, you have to ask yourself what I’ve been asking all along during the background-reading before this post.

What’s the point?

We’re humans. We like having words to describe things. We could just call every tree “tree,” but we have taxonomical classifications for a reason. There’s no reason to not have a word just because what it describes is common.

For someone who says “I can’t speak for each and every person’s feelings,” you’re doing a hell of a job speaking for other people and passing judgement despite not knowing what their feelings are, especially considering the fact that you apparently did research and yet said blatantly false things.

Followers, please reblog this, do not like.

pepsifree:

this is just a really good article i’ve admired so here; i didn’t write this socheck the sourcelink for the rest of the article and further links.

so there are all these pansexuals posting in forums, blogging, and reblogging shit about being pansexual.  rad.  we need pansexual discourse in order build a community; we need to share our stories and we need to learn from each other.  but.

the crushing majority  of the pansexuals i’ve encountered online seem to be grossly misinformed about pansexuality, trans* issues, bisexuality, and gender.  so i wrote this post for them.  actually, i wrote this post for everybody who’s interested– everybody needs to think about this shit.  if you already know this stuff– plasmic (and you know who you are, i’m sure).  if you disagree with it– let’s discuss it.  if you learn something from it– welcomes.

so, in no particular order, here’s what i think pansexuals need to know:

*   *   *

1.  binary trans* people experience BINARY gender.  this means that trans* women are women and trans* men are men.  end of fucking story.

so don’t say you’re pansexual cuz you’re into “men, women, and trans* people.”  when you say you’re pansexual cuz you’re into “men, women, and trans* people,” it sounds like you don’t think of, say, trans* men as MEN.  and that’s pretty cissexist/transphobic.

2.  non-binary trans* people experience non-binary gender.  non-binary trans* people may identify as bigender, agender, neutrois, genderbender, genderfluid, genderfuck, genderqueer, pangender, two-spirit, etc.

go ahead and say you’re pansexual cuz you’re into “men, women, and non-binary trans* people.”  that’s how many people experience pansexuality, along with being into people regardless of their gender (people experience pansexuality in many different ways).

3.  lots of intersex people experience binary gender.  this means that many intersex people are women or men.

so don’t say you’re pansexual cuz you’re into “men, women, and intersex people.”  when you say you’re pansexual cuz you’re into “men, women, and intersex people,” it sounds like you don’t think intersex people can be men or women.

4.  bisexuality is not inherently binarist.  despite the etymology, bisexuality doesn’t erase non-binary people.  sure, there’s a “bi” in “bisexuality”, but there’s also a “pig” in “guinea pig”.  i mean, we call stephen harper “the right honorable stephen harper”, for fucks sake.  so can we agree that the english language, though beautiful, is totally cocked up?  hang on to that idea.

5.  bisexuals can experience attraction to non-binary trans* people.  many bisexuals are not only familiar with and comfortable with non-binary trans* people, but are ATTRACTED to non-binary trans*people.  therefore, the “bi” in “bisexual” doesn’t indicate that bisexuals are only attracted to people of 2 genders.  it certainly doesn’t mean that bisexuals collectively erase non-binary trans* people.  in fact, some bisexuals are attracted to people regardless of gender.

of course, lots of bisexuals are only attracted to women and men.  let’s not erase them, k?  but don’t call them binarist; it isn’t binarist to only be attracted to people of binary gender.  i mean, you love who you love, right?  and you wanna fuck who you wanna fuck.

so, yeah, bisexuality and pansexuality often look (and possibly feel) exactly the same.  and it doesn’t fucking matter.

don’t just take my word for it; check out #15 for links to posts from the bi pov.

6.  everybody loves who they love.  heterosexuals do it, homosexuals do it, demisexuals do it, bisexuals do it, romantic asexuals do it– everybody does it.  we all love who we love.  so don’t try to explain pansexuality by saying, “i love who i love.”  i mean, i hope you don’t think that everybody else loves who they hate, cuz that’d be fucked.

7.  everybody loves people.  explaining pansexuality by saying “i love people” just licks.  that’s like saying that everybody else doesn’t love people.  they love, i dunno, juice.  or maybe finger paints (i do!).  so “i love people” DOES NOT explain pansexuality.  “i love people” just means you’re not a total zoophile and is not a stand-alone definition of pansexuality.

however, if “i love people, not just girls and/or boys”** is part of how you discuss your pansexuality, i think that’s pretty reasonable (as in, not problematic).  actually, i think that’s rather beautiful.

8.  gender is your internal sense of being female, male, or non-binary.  that’s it.  gender isn’t the same as gender expression.  gender isn’t anatomy, mannerisms, clothing, or sexual orientation.  gender is completely internal.

9.  gender expression is the way you present/communicate your gender to the world.  you can do this with clothing, mannerisms, pronouns, etc.

your gender expression probably matches your gender, insofar as it makes sense to you.  meaning, if you’re a woman and your way of expressing your femininity is to shave your head and go dirt biking– you are expressing your gender.  your gender expression doesn’t have to make sense to other people, but it should feel right to you.

10.  pansexuals can have sexual preferences.  seriously.  for instance, you don’t have to be attracted to all body types equally.  you CAN be attracted to all body types equally, but you can also go ahead and have some physical preferences and still be pansexual.

pansexuality hinges on the capacity to experience attraction to people of all genders (genders are hot!), possibly regardless of gender (people are hot– who cares about gender?).  pansexuality doesn’t hinge on the capacity to experience attraction to all bodies, though it may include it.  there’s a subtle difference there.

that said, many pansexuals experience attraction based entirely on personalities.  such pansexuals often have no physical preferences, though they can still have personality-based sexual preferences.

11.  pansexuality has nothing to with race.  this one fucking makes me delirious.  i haven’t found TOO many pansexuals talking about how their capacity to be attracted to people of all races makes them pansexual, but they’re out there and they’re fucking asshats.

i personally don’t associate race with sexual orientation.  some people have preferences (potentially very racist and shitty if based on stereotypes), but those preferences don’t define anyone’s sexual orientation, imo.  i mean, somebody could have a serious attraction to dark skin, be totally repulsed by pale skin, and still be pan.  right?  they could also have some serious racist potential depending on how they handled their attraction to dark skin, but they could totally be pan.

so, to reiterate, pansexuality hinges on the capacity to experience attraction to people of all genders, possibly regardless of gender.  don’t fucking bring race into it.

12.  lots of trans* people are not ok with being called “transgenders”.  a few trans people like the word, but lots of us think “transgenders” sounds rude.  you need to be aware of that when you’re slinging “transgenders” all over the internet.

if you want to call yourself “a transgender”– go ahead.  that’s cool.  just don’t apply “transgenders” to trans* people you don’t know unless you’re hoping to offend people.

i was going to try to explain the problem with “transgender” being used as a noun, but then i found this rad article.  i don’t have the excellent brain-fish required to explain this issue as explicitly as the article does, so just read it.

13.  “tr*nny” is a hate word.  it’s a violent word.  it’s a word you write on somebody’s face after you’ve beaten and possibly killed them.

hate words belong to the people they oppress.  this hate word is USUALLY used in attacks against trans* women, cross dressers, and occasionally other trans* folks.  so it’s their word.  they get to reclaim it or ditch it or whatever they fucking want– but you don’t get to help reclaim it unless you’ve been attacked with “tr*nny”.  attempting to “reclaim” a word that wasn’t yours in the first place is simple appropriation.

for instance, i’m a non-binary trans* person.  in the past, i’ve been visibly trans*, but i’ve never been called a “tr*nny”.  it isn’t my fucking word and i don’t fucking use it.

14.  (trans*/cis) women and (trans*/cis) men experience binary gender.  everybody else experiences non-binary gender, excepting people who don’t experience gender at all.  the gender binary is a gender system including only men/boys and women/girls as mutually exclusive categories.cis people identify with the gender they were assigned at birth.  trans* people don’t identify with the gender they were assigned at birth.  some trans* people experience fluid gender identification.  this is fucking important.  pansexuality specifically includes attraction to people existing outside the gender binary.  you need to understand these phrases: “binary gender,” “non-binary gender,” “gender binary,” “cis”, and “trans*” if you’re going to talk/write about pansexuality.

15.  you need to do some fucking research.  if you’ve already done some research, do some more research.  if you haven’t done any research, fucking get to it; now’s the time.  there’s no such thing as too much research and this shit is important.

i would also like to add that plenty of non-pansexual identities also experience attracted based on personalities only or gender only, or gender expression only, or a combination of the three (and possibly more). it can be a bit of a mess but i thought this article helped explain a lot of shit.

This is officially the best fucking thing I have ever read. Ever.

(via pepsifuckedintheass)

theoneguyoverthere:

Pan means: All

Bi means: Two

But only two genders exist. It’s not like there’s some magical 3rd gender.

someone please enlighten me.

Whoops.

OK, first of all, there are actually more than two genders.

There are people without a gender, and people who are bigendered, and there are people who are a third gender.

Now, there is some overlap. Sometimes “bi” means “two” as in “male and female.” Sometimes it means “both my gender and not my gender” (which can also be considered pan). Sometimes it means “both gender X and gender Y, but not gender Z.”

Pansexuality is also a bit problematic, because sometimes people define it as “men and women and trans people,” which is wrong because trans people are their gender. A trans man is still a man and therefore still male. “Pan” in its purest form is attraction to people of all genders, which can sometimes overlap with some definitions of bi.

So, basically: some bi people can “technically” be pan, and some pan people can “technically” be bi, and what matters is what they define themselves as.

So. This might also help.

glasscube:

What is to understand? Isn’t the difference pretty obvious? what? really? people? .-.

Not really. Some people’s definitions of bisexuality resemble those of pansexuality, and so it is not as clear cut as you think.

herrcoffey:

Read More

I was all

and then I was like

this made me happy