Talk:Pansexuality
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page. |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-class on the quality scale. |
 |
This article is being improved by the Cleanup Taskforce to conform with a higher standard of article quality. It is likely to change frequently until completed. Please see its Cleanup Taskforce page for more details. |
|
==Pansexuality== Messy and confusing, probably needs to be rewritten to be clearer and more easily understandable. Anti starlet 16:29, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
|
|
 Archives |
|---|
Contents |
[edit] Pansexual a weasel-word to avoid saying bisexual
I contend that the influence of biphobia is such that the word pansexuality (a true sexual orientation) is employed as a catch-all to get around having to self-identify as bisexual, an identity still popularly characterised as indecisive, unfaithful and untrustworthy. Nuttyskin 02:59, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
I agree, and also think it is good that on the main page it points out that the term 'bisexuality' is problematic as it enforces the concept of there only being two genders. Bethgranter 17:25, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
- Nope. "Bisexual" attraction is still widely used to for love within the male/female binary, usually, whereas as pansexuals can be attracted to/in love with the whole variety of people who do not fit into that binary. But that is only the usage-based meaning of the term I know. Maybe there are people who swap terms because they are surrounded by biphobics, who knows. It is strange to assume, however, that all peopel who identify as "pansexual" are automatically victims of biphobia.--80.171.77.169 06:35, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
- I also agree. People are much more willing to say for example that Jack Harkness is "omnisexual" because I think the British public would rather rationalise it as an alien sci-fi concept then comprehend actual bisexuality.~ZytheTalk to me! 23:01, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
-
- Except that one of the reasons that he is referred to as "omnisexual" is because he is attracted to males, females, humans, and non-human aliens. It's more than just a male/female issue, but also a human/alien issue. That is "an alien sci-fi concept" and should be referred to differently than real-life bisexuality, I think. --98.240.180.91 (talk) 06:18, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
“Pan means all.” So does “omni.” Pansexual means all-sexual. look it up in a dictionary. It seems clear that the Wikipedia "pansexuality" page has been taken over by people with an agenda, one to pretend that the two sexes or genders covers all sexual preferences, but of course that's absurd. Necrophilia, pedophilia, and beastiality are all sexual preferences too that would seem to clearly covered under the rubric of "pansexuality" or "all-sexuality," and there are many other forms of parasexualities such as fetishes. I'm not saying that all bisexuals are into any of those disgusting things . . . I am saying that bisexual does not equal pansexual because pansexuality by its very meaning covers much more than merely the two genders or sexes and somehow expanding those two genders or sexes into some spectrum would still simply not cover every form of human sexuality. Thus the entire page as it stands is stubbornly and blindly biased and tendentious to the point of absurdity.
as well, i don't see how pansexual is somehow a better fig-leaf word for bisexual. i might very well allow someone i thought truly bisexual to baby-sit my child, but i could never do that with someone i truly thought "pansexual."
- That's a bisexual with a fetish. Pedophiles and zoophiles are something altogether different from gays and bisexuals, as far as I see it.~ZytheTalk to me! 00:31, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
- I identify as pansexual and don't see what the big issue is. Bisexual implies two things that aren't true of me - a) that the gender of the people I'm attracted to is key in my sexual identity and b) that there are two genders. It's not a cop-out. It's just inaccurate for me. I can be attracted to transgendered people, and I don't see why that means I can't baby-sit someone's child as was suggested. I thought we were above this idea that someone having different sexual politics = a slippery slope into pedophilia, which has been a common argument used against gay men. Saying that pansexuals are more likely to be pedophiles just because "pan" does not mean "excluding children" is like saying that teachers are more likely to be murderers just because "teach" does not mean "excluding murdering". I mean honestly, are you kidding me? "Everything" refers to "every gender", not "everything that has an orifice"...just like "bi" refers to "both genders", not "both humans and animals" or "both living humans and dead humans" or "both children and adults" whatever other absurd interpretation. You can't have your cake and eat it too - if you want to have the right to self-identify your sexuality, you have to extend that to the rest of us. Even if we choose a designation that you don't like. --99.231.118.172 (talk) 07:36, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Possible Pansexual symbol
Since I haven't find any specific symbol for Pansexuality, I came out with one I ideated myself
This is the symbol alone:
It is derivated from the traditional symbols of male and female, combined together, and by the letter P, which can stand for Pansexual and/or Pride
I tried to be as accurate as possible in measurement and such, and it was quite an impegnative work since I used Paint. What do you think about it? Rosemarius 13:14, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
- I think it's a good symbol. However, I also think the "Romance, attraction, and preferences" section of this main article is full of irrelevancies and poor writing, including a particularly obvious sentence fragment. I'm inclined to recommend removing or replacing the section in its entirety. The text on conditional homosexuality reserved for a specific individual, while being worthy of commentary, does not belong in an article on Pansexuality, which, as described above, is more about making decisions on romance and sex with complete disregard to the biological and sociological sex or sexuality of one's suitors. -Fathom —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.83.137.87 (talk) 20:20, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
- With all due respect, aren't we here to document the phenomenon as opposed to being actors in its construction? How would we react, if editors over at Pedophilia decided to form their own pride symbol? Lambton T/C 23:23, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Possible symbol and flag
livejournal.com post and talk about the symbol
livejournal.com post and talk about the flag —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.242.186.253 (talk) 15:42, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
212.242.186.253 (talk) 15:43, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Possible sections
Based on stale discussions or remarks that were archived it may make sense to have sections specifically addressing terminology in respects to Pansexual vs. Bisexual (expanding on infor presented in lede), Pansexual vs. queer and Pansexual vs other possible terms that are cause of confusion. Benjiboi 01:56, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Grammar
The first sentence of the second paragraph ends with the phrase "regardless of either parties gender." That should be "regardless of either party's gender."
- Taken care of. Next time you see a grammar problem in a Wikipedia article, feel free to correct it without querying about it. Flyer22 (talk) 01:14, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Consenting Adults
I say pansexuals live with the belief of consentual sex between adults. As this sex is consentual between adults beastiality, necrophillia, child sex or any other disgusting acts should not be an issue. Love, sex and affection are very personal things and can be related to all genders, sexes and all other consenting adults. You should not be judged as imoral by society for your actions if you do not physically or emotionally hurt anybody and if you are hurt as a result of these actions it is by choice. Bi-sexual is a term that cannot be used to describe Pansexuals because it is not a true description of sexual preferences as there are more than two genders.
Dropthepilot (talk) 10:21, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Significant recent changes
I've made some drastic changes to this article. Undo, revert, and edit as you wish. The main changes I've made are eliminating redundant sentences, reordering sentences more logically, adding links, wikifying the language, and restructuring the sections as per Benjiboi's recommendation. Having done all this, I have a questions:
What was with the anthrosexual note? I don't see why we had a distinction note at the top saying pansexuality is not to be confused with anthrosexuality, but no further explanation of that in the article. The anthrosexuality article itself is a mess and marked for possible deletion, and has no cited or comprehensible reason for being distinct from pansexuality, so I've removed the distinction note. Anyway, I don't see why anthrosexuality warrants that note and not something like bisexuality, which is far more often confused with pansexuality. Does anyone have an opinion on this? --99.231.118.172 (talk) 03:50, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
