Text
PANSEXUALITY, TRANSPHOBIC AND BIPHOBIC?
Taking a deeper dive into the history of one of the most recent LGBT+ sexuality labels.
Older than you think
Many people who fight against the use of the term claim that pansexuality was created in 2002 on LiveJournal by people who claimed to see transgender people as a third gender (which is transphobic). However this is just false. This idea came from an article on Them.us written on the history of pansexuality.
However the article mentions that the usage of the word pansexual started around 1914.
Some other sources:
bisexual or pansexual?
One argument anti pansexuals use is that pansexuality and bisexuality are the same therefore pansexuality is unecessary and appropriating the definition of bisexuality.
The definition of bisexuality:
This definition made by bisexual people (the Bisexual Resource Center) is the most accurate because it shows what bisexuality really is: an umbrella term.
However the most common definitions used in LGBT+ spaces are attraction to two or more genders or attraction to more than one gender.
"But bi means two!"
It can, and some bisexuals are only attracted to two genders, however bisexuality isn't strictly binary and some bisexuals are attracted to more than two genders.
"But bisexuality is attraction to two sexes!"
That's the old definition, and it is transphobic because it reduces trans people to their genitals. Sexuality isn't about what sex you're attracted to, it's about who you are sexually attracted to. Pretending it's about genitals is saying that gay men can date trans women and still be gay, or that lesbians can date trans men and still be lesbians, which is both homophobic and transphobic. Hi, I'm Luc, I'm a lesbian and I'm not attracted to trans men. If I was I'd be bisexual.
Also if you believe bisexuality is attraction to two sexes or all genders, do not use the Bisexual Manifesto as a source.
The definition of pansexuality:
The official Stonewall website recognizes bisexuality as a spectrum of identities that includes pansexuality.
You hear it often: "pansexuality is biphobic because it's appropriating the definition of bisexuality!" However the definitions are not the same and you need to stop acting like they are, because that's actually pretty biphobic. Pansexuality is attraction regardless of gender/to all genders and bisexuality is attraction to more than one/two or more genders. A person who is attracted to all genders can use bisexual, pansexual or both but a person only attracted to two genders is by definition bisexual and cannot be pansexual. However labels are a person's choice and that is important to keep in mind.
THE BISEXUAL MANIFESTO
Anti pansexuals love to use the Bisexual Manifesto as a source. Here's why it's completely stupid:
First, context. The Bisexual Manifesto or ATM Manifesto was written in 1980 in a magazine called Anything That Moves that was created by the Bay Area Bisexual Network.
First, the reason anti pansexuals use it as a source is because it says that bisexuality isn't binary, which ,we've seen already with the definitions, is true and doesn't inherently invalidate pasexuality. Secondly, the Manifesto mentions this: "There are as many definitions of bisexuality as there are bisexuals. Many of us choose not to label ourselves anything at all, and find the word "bisexual" to be inadequate and too limiting." which goes against the anti pansexual logic of wanting all multisexuals to identify as bisexual and bisexual only. Lastly, the Network that created the Manifesto is actually pro pansexuality!
PANSEXUALITY, TRANSPHOBIC?
It was honestly hard to find a source talking about this very specific debate, but I finally found one!
Yep you read that right. A TERF subreddit. With a TERF denying the existence of nonbinary people talking about how pansexuality is somehow transphobic from her cisgender anti trans viewpoint. But I can't say I haven't seen people accusing the pan label of being transphobic and then turning around and saying transphobic stuff before.
This is what an anti pan person sent me after claiming pansexuality was a transphobic label. I'm gonna explain why this whole message is transphobic. I already explained why sexuality wasn't about attaction to biological sex, because if it was gay men would be dating trans women. That is extremely invalidating and dysphoria inducing for trans people. Then the claim that you can always guess someone's biological sex just by looking at them. That is plain wrong. I'm a female and I've been mistaken for a cis boy countless times. The only thing I did was cut my hair short. Also if you could always tell someone's sex by looking at them, the whole concept of passing wouldn't exist. This is actually an anti nonbinary argument, that you can't be attracted to nonbinary people because they either look male or female. Wrong and transphobic. Androgyny is a thing and nonbinary people want their gender to be recognized. Nonbinary is an actual gender just like man or woman, and you can be attracted to enbies. Saying otherwise is saying you'd be attracted to a nonbinary person because they have a vagina/penis or they look male/female. That's misgendering.
Then they say that being attracted to cis women and trans men doesn't make you bi, implying that lesbians can be attracted to men. First of all, as a lesbian I must say this is very lesbophobic. Secondly, I know many trans men, and this cold take would make most of them extremely uncomfortable if not horribly dysphoric. Lesbians are attracted to women, and sometimes nonbinary people, it depends of which dyke you're asking but one thing's sure: we don't date men. So this person was basically implying that trans men are women.
So conclusion: people who claim that pansexuality is transphobic don't actually care about transphobia. They just don't like the fact that pansexuality inherently includes a trans identity that bisexuality DOES include, but only sometimes (two or more, depending on the person), because if they succeed in erasing pansexuality, they can always pretend that bisexuality has never included nonbinary identities and therefore misgender a whole group of mostly trans identified people by reducing them to their assigned gender.
bisexuality, differences and biphobia
Pansexuality cannot be bisexual erasure, because they're simply not the same. In fact, pan inclusive source insist on informing people about misconceptions about bisexuality and biphobic myths as well. There is no erasure. Whenever the definition of pansexuality is brought up, bisexuality is always mentioned to be as inclusive and trans friendly as pansexuality is. Erasure? Where?
And if you're gonna claim pansexuality is contributing to bi erasure, citation needed. I need sources proving that.
PANSEXUALISM
So this is a topic I find interesting. Basically, anti pansexuals found out that the first popular usage of the word pansexual was in psychology. Pansexualism is a theory about human behavior "that regards all desire and interest as derived from sex instinct" so basically it's some shit about the sex instinct playing a part in literally everything you do...something like that.
What does this have to do with pansexuality? Well I'm glad you asked! Absolutely nothing. But for some reason anti pans want to pretend that they are the same... They're not. One is a hypothesis in psychology, the other is a LGBT+ sexuality. It's just like bisexualism and bisexuality. Similar names, very different things.
objectum pansexuality, and why it's harmful
What is objectum pansexuality?
Objectum pansexuality was created by an anti pansexual who identifies as pansexual and claims that the only valid definition of pansexuality is sexual attraction to men, women and objects.
First problem: this is not what objectum means! Objectum is the belief that objects have souls/personalities and that therefore you can form relationships with them. There's a term for people who fuck objects.
Anything that isn't attraction to gender (or lack of attraction to all gender) is NOT a sexuality, it's a fetish or a paraphilia. Kinks aren't LGBT+ and changing original definitions to fit your anti pansexual mentality is not an argument. Can we please stop making shit up? Pansexuality isn't a fetish. Also changing the original definition to replace nonbinary people by OBJECTS is super insulting. Leave nonbinary people alone please.
HEARTS NOT PARTS
Hearts not parts is a slogan that was sometimes used by the pansexual community a few years ago. The slogan was dropped for it's meaning, because it implied that every other sexualities were attracted to genitals.
...Or so we thought. Actually, the bisexual community did it too.
And from what it looks like, it was actually modified and the original slogan seems to be "love is about hearts not parts".
It's extremely difficult to actually know which community it came from, but the pansexual community seem to be widely rejecting "hearts not parts".
It wouldn't be accurate to associate the whole pansexual community to an obscure fake woke slogan that the pan and bi+ community seems to be hating and rejecting. Can't blame pansexuals for something we can't fact check.
THE PANSEXUAL and bisexual FLAGs
The pansexual flag was created by a queer woman named Evie Varney.
This is actually interesting because it disproves the anti pan argument that pansexuality is transphobic. In fact it proves that BISEXUALITY used to be transphobic before the meanings changed.
They also stole the meaning of the pansexual flag and it's inaccurate, as bisexuals aren't alway attracted to all genders. Some aren't attracted to nonbinary people, men or women.
Also the creator of the bi flag volunteers at BiNet USA, the people who tried to put a copyright on the bisexual flag.
WHY IDENTIFY AS PANSEXUAL INSTEAD OF BISEXUAL?
I have been collecting testimonies and some of them are really interesting.
Some simply said that the term pansexual was more fitting, as they felt the exact same attraction towards all genders with no distinctions or preferences.
Rosi, a pansexual cis woman, says: "it makes me feel safer. People tend to think that there are only gays, lesbians and bisexuality, and showing how proud I am to identify as pan(romantic/sexual) means I also get to raise awareness of other things outside the box, like nonbinary identities.
Context is important here: Rosi and I are both from a European country, where the most used definition of bisexuality is attraction to two genders and many bisexuals do not know much about trans and nonbinary identities or simply do not include them in their attraction. In those countries the notions of more than two genders and recognizing transgender identities are fairly new and therefore pansexuality is a much needed label to raise awareness of trans+ labels.
Leonum, a transgender man, talks about his experience with the bisexual label and why he rejects it:
"I had a lot of bad past relationships with bi people, talking about how me being trans pleases their bisexuality because "I'm the best of both worlds", it made me a little scared to be in a relationship with other bisexual people. I tried to find alternative labels because the bisexual label made me feel sick about myself, and then I started calling myself pansexual and I felt really relaxed and comfortable. Then anti pansexuals started attacking and threatening me, the fear turned into a paranoia, I would block people instantly if they followed and they were bi. I did get over that, but being called bi and and using the bisexual label never felt right, and after all of that, it triggers some real life trauma, which anti pansexual people don't seem to recognize even after they're told. The bi label or community has never felt right for me, not the way the pansexual one does."
I can already picture a cisgender person getting offended reading that, but there are priorities. Before screaming "internalized biphobia" you need to recognize that while the label bisexual is trans and nonbinary inclusive, there is still a huge issue with transphobia in the cis centered bisexual community, and that might be the reason why so many trans+ people prefer the the pansexual label.