What, if any, is the difference between Bisexuality and Pansexuality?

[Beckythewanderer]

Hi there,
I'm new to the site today. I was listening to radio 4 yesterday and picked up a documentary on Tom Robinson. He is open and proud of being Bi and so he should be. He mentioned that he really became acquainted with his sexuality through the use of forums such as these. Hence, here I am.

I am a Bi woman.. well I say this, here is my dilemma. I met a gay girl in college and she was very clued up on the different sexualities. I confided in her that I found women and men attractive in equal measure and, naively, had never really realised that this was any different to anyone else until I was in secondary school. I simply thought that everyone has these thoughts and were fine with it.
After I had my first girl crush on a close friend, I realised that actually it wasn't "normal" and that I had to deal with this.
Anywho, my gay friend asked how I felt about each gender, and I told her honestly that I didnt find "genders" attractive, I simply fell for different "people". It has always been this way and I know nothing different. This is not to say that I don't get turned on by peoples bodies, ofcourse I do, but not until I actually know them or have spoken to them, do I even comprenhend the attraction.
Now does this make me Bisexual or Pansexual? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pansexuality)
I am confused as to how others would categorise me? I have no problem with labels, I know that whatever I call myself, Gay, Straight, Bi, Pan.. I will still feel the same way.

Just a question. I would love to hear some thoughts of people that are a touch older than me. Another perspective is always good.

Thanks in advance,
Becky

[softfruit]

Don't panic, you are bisexual, at least for any useful meaning of the word. You're in one of the right places :)

You know how it was fashionable every few years to come up with a new word for disabled or black, to get away from the stigma that some people attached to the older words?

Pansexual's a lot like that as a new[ish] word for bisexual. People try to define the difference but they either come over as horribly biphobic, or as trying to define a difference like the difference between 'lesbian' and 'gay woman': you'll never define the dividing line between the two cos they are just about what words people prefer for themselves rather than any actual divide.

[Long Duck Dong]

ok, lol

generally people are classed as black or white, male or female, gay, straight lesbian or bi.....

nice, neat, boxed and labeled...

then you have the differing aspects of a person and that is where the issues start to arise, as you have the people that are anti labels and the people that say without labels, we lose our defining aspects that make us unique......

you have white, coffee, red, chocolate, tanned, sunkissed, dark etc as forms of skin color

male, female, intersex, gender queer, gender neutral, gender undefined transexual / trans gender, poly gender etc as forms of gender

les, gay, bi, straight, MSM / MSWM ( males that have sex with males ) FSF / FSWF ( females that have sex with females ) sexuality undefined, asexual, non sexual, pansexual, omnisexual etc as forms of sexuality.....


a bisexual is generally attracted to the male / female gender ( often using genitalia as a defining factor )
a bisexual can be pansexual but a pansexual is not always bisexual....

a pansexual is attracted to people and their qualities and aspects, so a pansexual can be interested in a gender neutral person, a poly gender person, the people that do not identify as a gender defination of male or female

a pansexual can be gay / les / straight / bi etc IE, a person can be a gay pansexual, they are attracted to males, male and F2m trans, male intersex etc but not females.....

a omnisexual is the person that lacks any form of gender / sexuality biased....
but its a term that most people have not heard of or understand......

its very confusing to people..... and yes as people argue that labels are too constricting and we should not have them, it can cause confusion..... as you can say you are bisexual but not attracted to genitalia but to people...

the person beside you can say they are only interested in genitalia, not the people and they are bisexual

the person on the other side, can say they are emotionally and sexually attracted to both genders, the sex is a bonus.....

the person behind you can say that they are interested in a relationship with one gender, casual sex with the other.....

the person in front of you can say that they love both genders equally, need them equally and want them equally....


confused yet ??????

simply... you are whatever you want to see yourself as... but the world is full of those that will tell you that labels and definations are wrong and stupid....
however without them.... there would be no differences between me and you and me and the person beside me etc etc.......

[tenni]

What are people who are physically sexually and/or romantically attracted to both csi men and csi women but not attracted to transgendered people? What are people who are attracted to both genders but not those in between genders?

[softfruit]

@ tenni - there's not a proper, commonly-used word for that, in the same way that there aren't words for the same situations with straight or gay people who are only interested in cis partners of a suitable gender, versus those who are interested in any partner of a suitable gender.

Bisexuality is the only identity to have all the crap about whether you are interested in trans people thrown at it, which tells us enough about how that argument is just a ruse to marginalise bi folk and avoid tackling biphobia.

Though I'm thinking here of a separate label - arguably the whole thing can be signalled simply by adding the word "uptight*" before the label gay/straight/bi, for them what lives in dread fear of transfolk!






* or perhaps "closeted" :)

[bityme]

Anywho, my gay friend asked how I felt about each gender, and I told her honestly that I didnt find "genders" attractive, I simply fell for different "people". It has always been this way and I know nothing different. This is not to say that I don't get turned on by peoples bodies, ofcourse I do, but not until I actually know them or have spoken to them, do I even comprenhend the attraction.

Thanks in advance,
Becky

Real communication between people only occurs when the person listening to the words has the same picture or understanding in their mind that the person speaking the words had. You can't have real communication through just the use of a label or a 140 character Twitter message.

No matter what label you pick to identify yourself, just think of it as your name tag at a large convention. Someone might remember your name, but it won't mean that they really know anything about you. That would take communication.

As you can see for the many and varied conversational threads in this forum, the label "bisexual" is merely a starting point. It does not explain the many variations in emotions or physical desires that bisexual individuals may, or may not, have. It would be extremely difficult, assuming it was even possible, to find someone whose emotions and desires matched your own.

The fact that you understand your attraction to a person better after you have gotten to know them says it all.

Pappy

[tenni]

That is rather a strange accusation to make. Sexual attraction is a reality and not a ruse to marginalize. Some bi men are sexually aroused by transwomen and some are not sexually interested. It has nothing to do with dread or fear of transfolks or discrimination of a person. Sexual attraction is sexual attraction. We are not all pansexuals and bisexuality is not the same as a pansexual. It is narrow minded to think that we are all sexually attracted to transexuals and then to throw closeted around as an attack or threat to say conform to the group think. What you have done is "jump the shark" as a bisexual political activist. That type of sexual political correctness is up there with gays who believe that bisexuals are all just in transition and gays in denial.


@ tenni -

Bisexuality is the only identity to have all the crap about whether you are interested in trans people thrown at it, which tells us enough about how that argument is just a ruse to marginalise bi folk and avoid tackling biphobia.

Though I'm thinking here of a separate label - arguably the whole thing can be signalled simply by adding the word "uptight*" before the label gay/straight/bi, for them what lives in dread fear of transfolk!








* or perhaps "closeted" :)

[Diva667]

pan-
 
a combining form meaning “all,” occurring originally in loanwords from Greek ( panacea; panoply ), but now used freely as a general formative ( panleukopenia; panorama; pantelegraph; pantheism; pantonality ), and especially in terms, formed at will, implying the union of all branches of a group ( Pan-Christian; Panhellenic; Pan-Slavism ). The hyphen and the second capital tend with longer use to be lost, unless they are retained in order to set off clearly the component parts.


bi-

having two: biangular, bicapsular
doubly, on both sides, in two ways or directions: biconvex, bilingual
coming, happening, or issued every two (specified periods): biennial, biweekly
coming, happening, or issued twice during every (specified period): often replaced by semi- or half-, to avoid confusion with preceding sense: bimonthly, biyearly
using two or both: bilabial, bimanual
joining two, combining or involving two: bilateral, bipartisan
Bot., Zool. twice, doubly, in pairs: bifurcate, bipinnate
Chem.: usually replaced by di- (sense ) except in the names of acid salts [potassium bitartrate]
having twice as many atoms or chemical equivalents for a definite weight of the other constituent of the compound: sodium bicarbonate
in organic compounds, having a combination of two radicals of the same composition: biphenyl


So those are the two concepts we are dealing with here-

Partly this comes from others who tell bisexuals that they are "supporting the binary and thereby supporting the patriarchy" (their words not mine.)

The other part is bisexuals who want nothing to do with anyone who is transgender in any form.

I would say that you are safe identifying as either. Most people would accept either bisexual or pansexual as answers when asked and then you can elaborate on those answers. Because most of us are more complex than a one word answer.

[tenni]

Diva
"The other part is bisexuals who want nothing to do with anyone who is transgender in any form. "

That is quite a different statement from stating that you are not sexually attracted to transpeople in transition. To "want nothing to do with a person" is not the same thing as sexual attraction.

I think that the OP seems to be stating that she is attracted to the person and not their gonads. She needs to get to know them and seems to be attracted to the personality rather than the sexual organs. Bi men who are sexually attracted to transexuals in transition may be similar and yet different from the OP. They are attracted to the combining or inclusion of primary and secondary sexual features of both genders in one person. For many, it is purely a physical sexual attraction and no emotion may be involved. The same for bimen who are not sexually attracted to transexuals in transition are quite different from the OP who is more emotionally bonding first with a person. They want women to have female sexual parts and men to have male sexual parts. They want both but just not in the same body. I'd say that she is more pansexual but as other state it is up to her to label herself or not. I think that we are talking apples/oranges/cherries..lol

[BiDaveDtown]

There is no difference they both mean the same thing.

I do agree with softfruit that many people who claim that they are pansexual do so because of internalized biphobia and to avoid calling themselves bisexual.

What people call Pansexuality would still be bisexuality: attraction to both genders since Trans people are men and women as well. Once you start breaking it down to more specific attractions then you're no longer speaking about orientation. someone who is "pansexual" is just another word for being bisexual.

I've seen pansexual used before to describe people who do illegal sex acts and that does not describe the bisexual people who happen to not have a gender preference or who are into Trans people.

Pansexual is a term that arose in the early 1900s to describe a way of thinking — especially prominent in certain psychoanalytic circles — that sexual instinct plays a part in all human thoughts and activities, even being the most important or only source of real energy in our lives. In fact, its earliest uses, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, were meant as insults directed at those psychoanalysts. Over the years, though, it has come to mean an openness to all sorts of sexual activities and groupings, including ones that society considers even more taboo than same-sex love.

[Annika L]

There is no difference they both mean the same thing.

I do agree with softfruit that many people who claim that they are pansexual do so because of internalized biphobia and to avoid calling themselves bisexual.

What people call Pansexuality would still be bisexuality: attraction to both genders since Trans people are men and women as well. Once you start breaking it down to more specific attractions then you're no longer speaking about orientation. someone who is "pansexual" is just another word for being bisexual.


I think where your notion breaks down is that there are not just two genders/sexes...gender and sex both occur as a continuum, with all kinds of stuff in the middle. Many people are attracted to the two poles (masculine/male and feminine/female), but get (very) uncomfortable with people in the middle (e.g., the genderqueer, the intersexed, or perhaps even a transperson in the midst of transition, or who has transitioned but has not had genital surgery).

So while I generally agree with your statement about transpeople (that they count as men and women, and so needn't count as an exception to bisexual preference), I do think there is a difference between someone who is attracted to "both" sexes/genders (i.e., a bisexual), and someone who is attracted to *all* sexes/genders (i.e., a pansexual).

[Hopefully I've managed to phrase this in a way that is not uncomfortable to any of those groups "in the middle"...my apologies if not...I did my best.]

[Beckythewanderer]

Thank you so much for your swift and detailed replies. I really am in the right place ;)

As I said, I am perfectly comfortable with how I am, and did not seek definition for me. I simply ask on behalf of family and friends, as it is easier for people to understand when it has a name that is in common use. My dad particularly found it tricky. He is an open minded man, you understand, however, I can appreciate how difficult it must be to try and sympathise with the sexual journey your teenage daughter is going through. I am trying to get to grips with everything in a short space of time.
I do appreciate all you have said, and I have learnt a lot just from those few posts! so many letters! lol CSI? I think I watch that on TV :p

PLease keep writing, you are educating a young girl more than you can know.