[ SECRET POST #5472 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5472 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 19 secrets from Secret Submission Post #783.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

Which carries a bit of a nasty implication that bi people are by definition exclusionary of anyone who doesn't adhere to a rigid binary

[(Anonymous)]

da

It doesn't so much carry that nasty implication as it's entirely built around that nasty implication.

[(Anonymous)]

ayrt

I kind of thought that pansexual was coined when bisexual was used to mean sexual attraction to two genders (only) and, yeah, was sort meant to imply bisexual was in some way exclusionary. I've never totally been sure why, because it didn't really make sense to me, but attributed it to some people wanting to feel special (and maybe wanting to feel like they were superior in some way). But I could be completely in the wrong here and that is not what anybody means by pansexual.

Anyway, bisexual referring to moving bidirectionally along a spectrum of sexuality more now seems much more apt.

[(Anonymous)]

da

Bisexual never meant sexual attraction to two and only two genders. That's a (false, biphobic and transphobic) definition that was retconned in by the people who coined pansexuality.

[(Anonymous)]

Another DA

This is completely irrelevant to the topic, and you can feel free to ignore my pedantic ass: But reality can’t really be “retconned”, because real life doesn’t have continuity that can be retroactively changed the way fiction does.

[(Anonymous)]

It absolutely *can* have that implication, but I don't think it necessarily has to? It can also just be a way of being more specific. 'Bi' just means attracted to more than one gender, which may include any/all genders, but doesn't necessarily. Someone who's only into the two binary genders could identify as bi, so could someone who's into women and non-binary or agender folks but not men, so could someone for whom gender doesn't factor into attraction at all. 'Pan' is sort of a sub-set of 'bi' that explicitly asserts attraction to any/all genders. It's sort of like the difference between saying you don't eat meat and saying you're vegan - the former encompasses the later, but doesn't necessarily imply it since it also covers other possibilities.

Personally, I identify as bi rather than pan both because I don't feel a need to be more specific and because I'm not actually sure if I'm attracted to people outside the binary or not (absence of evidence doesn't equal evidence of absence and all that), but I can see why some people prefer to make that assertion.

[(Anonymous)]

NAYRT I think of it as bi meaning more than one and pan meaning all