Any pansexuals here?

[Amaris]

Am I pansexual? No, I can’t say I’ve ever found this guy attractive.

Eh, I don't think I'd ever faun over him myself.

*groan*

In any event you are sexual snobs if you think you are above being bi

Riiiiiiiiiight.

To say that one does not belong to a group is not the same as saying they're "above" that group. One likes what one likes; to point that out is not being homophobic or bi-phobic or any of that crap.

Yeah. It's the equivalent of thinking someone's a snob because they're a black guy in a room full of white guys. It just doesn't compute at all.

 

[SiorX]

It is necessary to mock this further devaluation of the concept of somethingosexuality. One is attracted to men, women, animals, children, or any combination of the above. No need to invent more words to say the same thing.

(unless you are really hard up and can't get your mind off it)

Why pansexual? Pan = goat man

In any event you are sexual snobs if you think you are above being bi

In the words of Mike Myers - you're not just wrong, you're stupid.

Moi aussi. But I tend not to use the term, because it often just creates confusion.

It's not always simply being genderblind. I know people for whom that's the case, but personally I find gender-play and variant gender expressions attractive in and of themselves.

I like using the terms (omni/pan) because the more usage they get, the more people will want to figure out what they mean, the less mystifying it becomes.

You might have a point. There are variant definitions out there for both, but I suppose that's a problem with all labels.

If I did ID as pan it'd be on the grounds that the binary gender system is often about as helpful to me as dry measures in recipes. (Not completely useless, but it requires some faffing around with Google conversions.)

 

[Balrog]

I did have a thing for Mary Martin as a kid.

 

[RJDiogenes]

Also, one's sexuality has nothing to do with being "hard up".

Must... bite... tongue....

In the words of Mike Myers - you're not just wrong, you're stupid.

Making it a quote doesn't make it any less Flaming; please don't stoop to that level, especially when there are so many legitimate retorts.

 

[T'Girl]

Someone who is omnisexual/pansexual doesn't have sex with animals, and certainly isn't a pedophile.

Not exactly, while a pansexual (omnisexual) wouldn't automatically be pedophile, someone who was attracted to all adult genders and all immature genders could be described as a pansexual. Also someone whose eye occasional wonder into the animal kingdom, well them too.

Not all balls are baseballs, but all baseballs are balls.

So if you feel comfortable discussing it, please 'fess up.

Yes, I guess I am to tell the truth. (just human adults though)

There been conjecture through the years that Star Trek characters who engage in sexual activity with non-terrestrial aliens were practicing a form of bestiality, perhaps pansexuality would be a more apt description.

 

[Amaris]

Not exactly, while a pansexual (omnisexual) wouldn't automatically be pedophile, someone who was attracted to all adult genders and all immature genders could be described as a pansexual. Also someone whose eye occasional wonder into the animal kingdom, well them too.

Not all balls are baseballs, but all baseballs are balls.

Certainly, just as in homosexuality, bisexuality, and heterosexuality, there are always going to be those who deviate into bestiality and pedophilia. That's just true of any orientation, because pedophilia and bestiality are sexual variations that are not limited to orientation.

What I'm saying is that just because one is pansexual/omnisexual, does not mean one is a pedophile or into bestiality, which is to what Nick was alluding.

 

[Captain_Nick]

You cannot call yourself omnisexual and then pick and choose what you are attracted to. Suck it up, you are bi

 

[Misfit Toy]

You cannot call yourself omnisexual and then pick and choose what you are attracted to. Suck it up, you are bi

Since when do you get to decide someone else's sexuality?

 

[RoJoHen]

"Pan" and "omni" really aren't the most accurate prefixes for this term. They imply that one is attracted to everything.

 

[Misfit Toy]

"Pan" and "omni" really aren't the most accurate prefixes for this term. They imply that one is attracted to everything.

DarthTom posted this way back on page one:

Pansexual, to me, implies that people are sexually attracted to everything. So no, I hope nobody actually fits this description.

Apparently pan sexual includes gender identities. Women dressing as men and vice versa and/or people who feel naturally like a different sex than they were born as.

pansexual

1. Adjective: A group which is open to members of all sexual orientations or gender identities including straight, gay, lesbian, bisexual, transexual, or transvestite.

 

[RoJoHen]

Oh, I know what it's supposed to mean. But I also know what "pan" and "omni" mean by themselves.

There is discrepancy between the terms.

 

[Misfit Toy]

I don't really see it. After all, an "omnivore" doesn't eat metals and rocks...

 

[RoJoHen]

Yeah...I dunno. I think I'm just arguing to argue.

 

[Amaris]

You cannot call yourself omnisexual and then pick and choose what you are attracted to. Suck it up, you are bi

Since when do you get to decide someone else's sexuality?

Agreed. I'd also like to point out that there's no competition or shame being pushed here, so the insecurity in Nick's posts are unnecessary.

Oh, I know what it's supposed to mean. But I also know what "pan" and "omni" mean by themselves.

There is discrepancy between the terms.

Omni:

"all : universally <omnidirectional>"

Pan:

1
: all : completely <panchromatic>

2
a : involving all of a (specified) group or region <Pan-American> b : advocating or involving the union of a (specified) group <Pan-Slavism>

3
: whole : general <panleukopenia>

The two terms match up perfectly.

 

[SiorX]

Oh, I know what it's supposed to mean. But I also know what "pan" and "omni" mean by themselves.

There is discrepancy between the terms.

OTOH, the 'bi-' prefix in 'bisexual' doesn't offer a definition of a binary gender system, or a caveat about selective attraction within each of the two groups. We just understand and extrapolate from context.

 

[Captain_Nick]

You cannot call yourself omnisexual and then pick and choose what you are attracted to. Suck it up, you are bi

Since when do you get to decide someone else's sexuality?

Well until you people start figuring this stuff out for yourselves, I'm going to have to carry the responsibility.

If you all spent less time watching Star Trek and more time learning what the prefixes 'omni-' and 'pan'- meant, we wouldn't be in this situation.

 

[RoJoHen]

Context shmontext.

 

[Amaris]

You cannot call yourself omnisexual and then pick and choose what you are attracted to. Suck it up, you are bi

Since when do you get to decide someone else's sexuality?

Well until you people start figuring this stuff out for yourselves, I'm going to have to carry the responsibility.

If you all spent less time watching Star Trek and more time learning what the prefixes 'omni-' and 'pan'- meant, we wouldn't be in this situation.

Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary seems to agree that the two terms are alike enough that they can be used interchangeably.

 

[T'Girl]

Omni:

3 : general <panleukopenia>

Hmmm, general-sexual. Yeah, that works pretty good.

Look, people who self-describe as bi-sexual (the term I usually use) are not having sex with everyone of both genders, nor does it mean they're even sexually attracted to everybody within both genders, but they're still bi-sexual. Engaging in absolutism is giving you a false view of reality.

Pansexual doesn't mean that you're have sex with pans.

 

[Amaris]

Omni:

3 : general <panleukopenia>

Hmmm, general-sexual. Yeah, that works pretty good.

Look, people who self-describe as bi-sexual (the term I usually use) are not having sex with everyone of both genders, nor does it mean they're even sexually attracted to everybody within both genders, but they're still bi-sexual. Engaging in absolutism is giving you a false view of reality.

Bi:

1
a : two <bilateral> b : coming or occurring every two <bicentennial> c : into two parts <bisect>

2
a : twice : doubly : on both sides <biconvex> b : coming or occurring two times <biannual> — compare semi-

3
: between, involving, or affecting two (specified) symmetrical parts <bilabial>

4
a : containing one (specified) constituent in double the proportion of the other constituent or in double the ordinary proportion <bicarbonate> b : di- 2 <biphenyl>

There is a distinct difference between "bi" and "pan/omni".
I mean, that's like saying "Oh my God! A tiger is about to attack us!" and someone chimes in "or it could be a kitten". While you don't have to be "absolute", words do have definitions that mean things.

Pansexual doesn't mean that you're have sex with pans.

Buh?