[ SECRET POST #2188 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2188 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.


__________________________________________________













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 05 pages, 102 secrets from Secret Submission Post #313.
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

[thene]

You know what this is? This is biphobia. Accusing bisexuals (without any evidence, obv) of offending third-gender people, or of being gender fetishists, or of being sluts (no really, a pan-identifying person once told me that she didn't ID as bi because bi people are totes all into casual sex)...it is all straight-up biphobia and I am sick of hearing it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shibboleth <---this really is the best word

[(Anonymous)]

That really is the best word. It also sounds like an Lovecraftian creation, which... seems kind of appropriate.

[fuchsiascreams]

Gender fetishists? Are you fucking kidding me?

[fuchsiascreams]

Also, just the other day on Facebook, I had an acquaintance of mine try to tell me that people who are bisexual are actually just shallow because they aren't pansexual. I was appalled. I mean, if bisexual people are shallow, then why aren't heterosexual and homosexual people shallow, too? Why is it that every sexuality EXCEPT pansexuality is shallow? But nope, according to him, it's only bisexuals who are shallow, because we didn't just "decide" to be pansexual instead. (In other words, bisexuals choose to be bisexual, and everybody else can't help it, they were just born that way.)

[(Anonymous)]

He sure is a special one...

[thene]

Wat.

Even if 'bisexual' DID specifically mean only being attracted to binary-gendered people, that would still make no sense at all. This is a corollary to the 'the only way to express support and appreciation for something is to be sexually attracted to it' problem that you see so much of in fandom, isn't it? (be it men, women, older people, fatter people, nonbinary people, people with beards, heroes, villains, people of any given race...someone somewhere will have said you're a bigot if you don't want to have sex with it. Sob.)

[insanenoodlyguy]

Okay, real ask. I honestly thought that this was the difference between bisexual and pansexual. that bisexual tended to remain in a binary system and pansexual did not. So... could I have some clarification? because apparently I'm doing it wrong.

[thene]

I do not know, for sure, what the kids are up to with words these days, and I fear I am going to be guilty of doing exactly what they do and trying to rewrite what someone else's orientation means. I'll try, though.

My impression is that the people who come out as pansexual now are the same people who would have come out as bisexual more than a few years ago, and the label preference is simply a matter of which word you like best for cultural purposes. Certainly if you read the definition of 'pansexual' to an adult bisexual person, they will almost always tell you that is their orientation but you've got the name wrong, because srsly coming out as specifically being not attracted to genderqueer people is not something many human beings have ever done. It would be quite a silly thing to do.

So what 'pansexual' signifies is direct rhetorical inclusivity of people who aren't either men or women. Some people really like signalling this inclusivity because it's really relevant to their community & culture. Other people feel that (as 'bisexual' means homosexual+heterosexual, not men+women) it's not necessary for them to signal this in order to be inclusive, and that 'bisexual' is a more useful word for other reasons. I've also heard some people say they use 'pansexual' because it has 'less baggage' than 'bisexual', which I guess is an attempt to shake off mainstream biphobia (YOU ARE ALL CONFUSED SLUTS GOING THROUGH A PHASE, A PHASE OF EXTREME NONMONOGAMY AND SPREADING AIDS AND OPPRESSING TRANS PEOPLE) but there is no way that is going to work for long.

However, bets may off for younger people who have come out as bisexual in the age of tumblr. I don't know, because I've literally never met anyone who both identifies as bi and uses the binary-gender-only definition of the word, but I've been told that some of these people do exist. [ETA JUST TO CLARIFY MY CLARIFICATION plenty of bi people say they're attracted to both men and women, but that's usually just a turn of phrase rather than a complete and accurate statement of their attractions. I feel like 'pansexual' is a word for a queerer world, one with more cultural third-gender visibility and maybe less of a homosexual/heterosexual binary. It sure must be nice to have grown up in that world and be able to live there and make the rent, but my life experience is more of a bisexual one.]

[(Anonymous)]

As a bisexual woman, that's very well put, thank you. I'll also add that personally I have no emotional connection to the word "pansexual" so it feels made up to me. It's not something I can identify with at all.

[fuchsiascreams]

Totally agree with this comment, and the one it responded to. It's not that I'm not attracted to people who are genderqueer - it's just that I didn't really grow up with the word "pansexual", and I don't really feel any mental connection to it. When someone says "pansexual", in my head I'm not like, "oh, wait, they're talking about me". When someone says "bisexual", I'm like, "hey, that includes me!", even though, for all intents and purposes, they're basically the same thing.

Although maybe I'm crazy, but I don't know if there should be a separate sexuality specifically to include people who are genderqueer. Because then wouldn't we need a separate sexuality for heterosexual people and homosexual people who also can/are attracted to genderqueer individuals? Or people who are cis and attracted to genderqueer individuals, people who are genderqueer who are attracted to genderqueer individuals..

[thene]

Yyyyeah something about the inclusivity issue being applied only to bisexuals doesn't feel right to me. Like we're being held, en masse, to a litmus test that monosexuals are not. And meanwhile, genderqueer people are out there dating all kinds of people - including lesbians, gays and straights. It's not like pansexual-identified people own genderqueers' underwear, so I'm not sure why they'd be held up as the One True Inclusive Identity.

Unless, you know, we were caring more about terminology than about what people actually do with their lives IRL.