this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2023
567 points (94.5% liked)

Asklemmy

43940 readers
827 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Most of the time when people say they have an unpopular opinion, it turns out it's actually pretty popular.

Do you have some that's really unpopular and most likely will get you downvoted?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CheeseBread@lemmy.ml 309 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (19 children)

Pansexual, polysexual, and omnisexual are all microlabels and are all subsets of bisexual. You don't need more labels than gay, straight, and bi.

Edit: I forgot about asexuals. But I specifically only care about bi subsets. They're dumb, and you only need bi

[–] pizza-bagel@kbin.social 102 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And asexual

But I agree. The bi community already collectively decided we are trans and nonbinary inclusive. We don't need to further separate it out.

[–] Xanaus@lemmy.ml -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] NickwithaC@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

4th quadrant.

  • straight = attracted to opposite
  • gay = attracted to same
  • bi = attracted to both
  • ace = attracted to neither
[–] Treefox@lemmy.ml 35 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I agree. All the little bitty addages don't make sense. You can be bi and still have preferences. Just keep it simple gosh dangit.

[–] June@lemm.ee 20 points 1 year ago

I think there’s value for folks in the community to have the hyper-specific labels. I’m saying this as a bi person who agrees that pan, Omni, etc are sub categories of bi.

[–] RagingNerdoholic@lemmy.ca 27 points 1 year ago (3 children)

And here I thought pansexual meant you really like cookware.

[–] habitualcynic@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

Unexpected Schitt’s Creek

[–] writeblankspace@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago

I thought it was just a joke, since the first time I heard that word there was a picture of a pan. Similar to people who say they identify as spaghetti.

[–] ougi@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago

Is that really what you thought, or just an attempt at humor? Be honest ;)

[–] Today@lemm.ee 9 points 1 year ago

Agree. I understand expressing acceptance of non hetero love so kids know that there are other options and they're valued, but i don't need to know what labels everyone has chosen, who they're having sex with, or what is under their undies. And i believe that many people who are medically trans are chasing a masculinity or feminity that they feel is not allowed as a male or female and it's sad that the stereotype is what they're moving towards or away from instead of individuality. Also, kinda drunk, so probably disregard.

[–] jsnc@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Exactly, words that are synonyms to other words but have different linguistic backgrounds, history, and nuance should just be discarded.

Now please, help me burn these thesauruses.

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Oh please how old can these terms be

Don't answer that it's probably older than I think isn't it

[–] jsnc@lemmy.blahaj.zone -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No don't worry. We can describe the totality of human sexuality and existence with three simple words: gay, straight, or bi. All these other labels confuse the straight people and therefore should be discarded to appeal to straight people's infinite compassion.

[–] CheeseBread@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

I say this as a bi person, not a straight

[–] cosmicsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Upvoted, but I have a slight disagreement. I think bisexual should actually be a label under pansexual. Bisexual doesn’t necessarily account for anyone outside the gender binary.

[–] CheeseBread@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago

Yes it does. Read the bisexual manifesto.

[–] BlueFairyPainter@feddit.de 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Out of interest, why? Shouldn't it be the other way around, that bi is a subset of pan?

[–] CheeseBread@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Read the bisexual manifesto. Bi has always included nonbinary people. If you are attracted to all genders, both bisexual and pansexual are valid labels you can choose.

[–] BlueFairyPainter@feddit.de 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Actually didn't know that, even though I identify as bi lol. Pretty sure my other bi and pan friends didn't know either from the kinds of discussions we've had. But then that's just a bad choice linguistically, no? It's very misleading because you literally have the terms bi and non-bi and you need to read some manifesto to understand that they're not a contradiction. Meanwhile aside from the stupid overdone cookware joke, I think nobody ever questioned the meanings of terms like pan or omni, because they make sense linguistically.

[–] CheeseBread@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Homosexual is attraction to the same gender; heterosexual is attraction to a different gender. The bi in bisexual is both of these, not attraction to two genders. Think of the bi flag, pink, purple, and blue: what do you think the colors represent? Nonbinary people have always been included in bisexual if you take some time to think about.

[–] BlueFairyPainter@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago

I don't doubt your textbook correctness or the historical correctness of this, and maybe I should stress that I am not trying to exclude anyone from the bi term, but at least in my anecdotal experience, these terms are mostly used "wrongly", meaning that there is a lot of confusion. And the meanings of words change as people start using them with different intended meanings.

Therefore, given the premise that we want to simplify things by cleaning up some redundant terms, I would prefer to keep the one whose meaning is intuitively clear to everyone. I just don't see why - given bi, pan and omni all mean the same thing - one should choose the most misunderstood/misused term.

Personally, I would just keep the terms and let people choose whichever they like, I'm just trying to entertain this discussion of choosing to keep only one of them and the pros/cons for each choice.

[–] Wirlocke@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 months ago

As a pansexual I feel that Bi and Pan have enough differences to both be justified while the others are micro labels (not invalid, just less useful as labels).

But I recognize I'm drawing that line very conveniently for myself.

[–] CeruleanRuin@lemmings.world 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Here's an unpopular opinion: you don't need any labels at all. You love who you live, you fuck who you fuck, you can advertise what you're looking for if you want to but all this identity business obscures the reality that humans are far more diverse and interesting than the boxes we build for ourselves.

Most people who call themselves straight would fuck someone from their own gender if there weren't cultural expectations against it hammered into them from and early age. Most people who call themselves gay would wander if they found someone they connected with. Very few of us rest at one end of any spectrum or matrix. Most of us are somewhere in the middle, and far more mobile than we might realize.

[–] ougi@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

subsets of bisexual

What does bi cover that pan doesn’t :-)

[–] PsychedSy@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

If you say you're bi nobody thinks you fuck woks.

[–] doggle@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

If we're splitting hairs, bi should be a sunset of pan.

Also, there is some need for a fourth "none of the above" label...

[–] damnedfurry@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

Atheism isn't a religion, likewise asexuality is not a sexual orientation, but the lack of one, I say.

[–] Floey@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

I think this thinking falls into the common belief that "sexuality" and preference within "sexuality" are actually distinct things. I really think everyone's sexual preferences are unique, and so even microlabels don't do them justice. But I don't think the purpose of labeling your sexuality is meant to be perfectly descriptive, it's a way to connect with people over shared parts of their experience with sexuality and that can be as coarse or fine as you want it to be. You say there should be only straight, gay, and bi, but we could go even more broad and say there should only be cishet and queer.

[–] Xanaus@lemmy.ml -1 points 11 months ago