Actually, there’s no reason to fight, we’re all on the same side.
Bisexual and Pansexual are basically the same thing and that’s not a controversial thing to say. Language is flexible and there’s nothing wrong with adding words to a vocabulary if you feel more aligned to a particular word/definition.
I see it a bit like music obsessive’s who are really into a particular genre and protect it fiercely even though the difference may be indistinguishable to the layperson.
Like arguing over 24 sub-genres of dubstep.
This is mostly harmless, nothing bad will happen to anyone defending their stance, they’re just music nerds arguing amongst themselves.
That sadly isn’t true in the bi vs pan debate.
I will come out swinging in favour of the bisexuals because the emerging/emergent definition I see, (mistakenly being perpetuated) is that bisexuals are only attracted to the binary definitions of men and women.
Some people may say:
‘Just use Pan, it saves you explaining yourself!’
Sure, but one; that’s bi-erasure and two; if you’re not hung up about the language, why don’t you call yourself bisexual instead?
Why do the bisexuals have to be supplanted?
Why does this matter?
The origins of both words are rooted in science and botany, they have been adapted and applied to human sexuality which has led to some misunderstandings.
The biggest having to do with ‘bi’ prefix where people automatically seem to assume that means two.
This is a language/semantic thing and it’s quite tedious to be honest, but here we go.
The correct definition of bisexual is: ‘attraction to two or more genders.’
But people see ‘bi’ and assume only two, which is a bigger problem than it sounds.
Before we get to that, how many wings does a biplane have? Is it two? No, it’s not, depending on how you choose to count the wings there could be three, four or even six!
Do either of those planes have just two wings?
How often is biannual? Twice a year, or once every two years? It can actually be both or you could use semiannual or biennial.
As long as the correct meaning is agreed upon, the ‘bi’ prefix is pretty flexible.
I recently saw somebody post a meme about bisexuality in a closed group I’m in and I decided to change it.
This was the original post:
I saw this and decided to alter the text, expressing no shade directed at the OP:
This was met with somebody incorrectly trying to correct me.
According to them:
‘If they’re bi, the meme should say ‘either gender’, if they’re pan, it should say ‘any gender’’
*cracks knuckles*
Their definition of a bisexual is completely wrong, they’ve also simultaneously discounted the existence of non-binary bisexuals.
It also assumes that non-binary people don’t look like men or women, which again in false. There’s no way to tell and non-binary people don’t owe you androgyny!
If I was hitting on a guy at a bar, we had a smooch, exchanged numbers and then I later discovered through chat that they’re actually non-binary, does that mean that I’m suddenly pansexual?
No, it just means that the definition of bisexual is more expansive and inclusive than some people seem to think it is.
It makes zero sense to me that bisexuals would be exclusionary, in fact they’re natural allies to trans and non-binary people due to an attraction regardless of gender.
It irks me that people are under the false impression that bisexuals are somehow TERF adjacent and argue the point even when an actual bisexual person is telling them otherwise.
And it seems some people in the queer community are perpetuating it.
Somebody asked me:
‘What about those bisexuals that openly say they’re only attracted to men or women?’
Well, I’ve gotta say, I’ve never met one! I have no doubt they exist though.
But, that is not proof of anything. Bisexual is a broad umbrella and just as diverse as any other sexual orientation.
Gay or Lesbian doesn’t have this problem, they don’t need to defend themselves against the idea that they’re exclusionary because of a prefix.
People accept that those groups contain TERFS, misogynists, racists and all manner of other wrong ‘uns.
But they know that those aren’t the majority, they don’t speak for the whole group, they’re (thankfully) in the minority.
So implying that bisexual is attraction to only two genders is actually harmful and perpetuating a negative stereotype that the entire bisexual community is exclusionary.
Once again, it’s NOT.
Lastly, somebody objected to the idea that pansexual as a term is being dismissed as:
‘Just a glitch of bi-dom’
Well, I don’t want to discount anybody’s feeling about that, but there’s a great featured post on this account that explains it better than me:
https://www.facebook.com/RegardlessOfGender
What is the complaint there really?
The person in question was happy for bisexuals to lose their label and join pansexual for simplicity, but not the other way around.
Pansexual also doesn’t have to defend itself against people who assume it’s somehow exclusionary. There’s not the same level of pan-erasure as there is bi-erasure and I’m not sure anyone has ever talked to me about pan-phobia… That’s not to say it doesn’t exist, but the people I was debating with online were (whether they realised or not) being bi-phobic and in favour of bi-erasure.
I’m not bashing pansexual’s here by the way, I actually describe myself as ‘bi/pan’ because it covers all bases and I don’t think adding a descriptor is harmful. I also use it to avoid lengthy explanations like this one…
But I shouldn’t have to.
I’m bisexual and if you assume I’m exclusionary, then your information is wrong and I’ll gladly tell you why.
Identify however you like, use whatever labels you feel best fit, adding is fine, but be wary of removing or replacing.
So if you ever wonder why bisexuals defend their label and like to use it, remember that bi-erasure and bi-phobia is alive and well.
Please don’t assume that bisexuals are only attracted to two genders, because it simply isn’t true.
If you’d like a deeper dive I recommend giving this a watch:
Scan to donate
