Via The Bisexual Index on Twitter

[Picture is a series of tweets by The Bisexual Index which read:]

This is a very interesting thread and they make some good points as to why “more than one” would be preferable to “two or more”.

I specifically dislike the “same and other genders” definition due to the way it submits to the “bi = 2″ definition and also specifies a particular gender you have to be attracted to and, in The Bisexual Index’s words, “it footnotes the other genders”. (and since the SGA discourse I really don’t trust people who use it for the whole community).

But I also feel that “more than one” and “two or more” are equally inclusive and reflective of everyone in the bi community so they can be used more interchangeably than some other definitions, though I’ll definitely consider promoting the “more than one” definition a bit more going forward.

i prefer the term “pansexual” for me because no matter how you define “bisexual” “bi” still means two, and not “more than one” or “two or more”. I really don’t see the “same and other gender_s_” in “bi”. It feels like people notices their (conservation) word for identity doesn’t match the actualised idea of gender and instead of letting the word go as something outdated they cling to it :x The word “bi” only then doesn’t support the idea if two genders when it’s unknown or questioned and that’s not often enough for me.

I’m okay with people identifying as bi though, it’s just the reason I don’t.

As ever many pansexual people continue to have biphobic reasons for IDing as pansexual.

The definitions can overlap and the different identities are still valid - and pansexuality isn’t some “new” term to replace the “outdated” bisexuality, bisexuality is an identity with its own history and community that has developed over decades.

Can we update the definition of pansexuality to include their inability to stay in their lane?

so if bisexual is supposed to mean >1 what is pansexual supposed to mean, and what are the differences?

Not “supposed to mean”, it does mean that :)

The differences aren’t that important really, but pansexual makes it more clear you are attracted to all genders. Anyone attracted to more than one gender has many different labels they can chose from, but they are still attracted to more than one gender which is an important thing we have in common.

Via The Bisexual Index on Twitter

[Picture is a series of tweets by The Bisexual Index which read:]

This is a very interesting thread and they make some good points as to why “more than one” would be preferable to “two or more”.

I specifically dislike the “same and other genders” definition due to the way it submits to the “bi = 2″ definition and also specifies a particular gender you have to be attracted to and, in The Bisexual Index’s words, “it footnotes the other genders”. (and since the SGA discourse I really don’t trust people who use it for the whole community).

But I also feel that “more than one” and “two or more” are equally inclusive and reflective of everyone in the bi community so they can be used more interchangeably than some other definitions, though I’ll definitely consider promoting the “more than one” definition a bit more going forward.

i prefer the term “pansexual” for me because no matter how you define “bisexual” “bi” still means two, and not “more than one” or “two or more”. I really don’t see the “same and other gender_s_” in “bi”. It feels like people notices their (conservation) word for identity doesn’t match the actualised idea of gender and instead of letting the word go as something outdated they cling to it :x The word “bi” only then doesn’t support the idea if two genders when it’s unknown or questioned and that’s not often enough for me.

I’m okay with people identifying as bi though, it’s just the reason I don’t.

As ever many pansexual people continue to have biphobic reasons for IDing as pansexual.

The definitions can overlap and the different identities are still valid - and pansexuality isn’t some “new” term to replace the “outdated” bisexuality, bisexuality is an identity with its own history and community that has developed over decades.

Via The Bisexual Index on Twitter

[Picture is a series of tweets by The Bisexual Index which read:]

This is a very interesting thread and they make some good points as to why “more than one” would be preferable to “two or more”.

I specifically dislike the “same and other genders” definition due to the way it submits to the “bi = 2″ definition and also specifies a particular gender you have to be attracted to and, in The Bisexual Index’s words, “it footnotes the other genders”. (and since the SGA discourse I really don’t trust people who use it for the whole community).

But I also feel that “more than one” and “two or more” are equally inclusive and reflective of everyone in the bi community so they can be used more interchangeably than some other definitions, though I’ll definitely consider promoting the “more than one” definition a bit more going forward.

I’m gonna say right off the bat that this Tumblr ‘SGA Discourse’ Bullshit is absolutely coloring my perspective on this but… I kind of think ‘bisexual means attraction to more than one gender’ has similar problems. If the ‘two or more genders’ definition has the connotation of ‘boys and girls and maybe more’ I am gonna be extremely wary of the ‘more than one genders’ definition having the connotation of ‘the same gender as yourself and other genders too’ (or something similar).

Which isn’t really a problem with the definitions in and of themselves, but a problem with shitty people being shitty and using the definitions for shitty purposes. (like I have issues with the ‘same and different genders’ and ‘two genders full stop’ definitions in and of themselves, on anything beyond a personal level)

And I don’t entirely agree with the notion that ‘two or more genders’ isn’t a meaningful departure from the ‘there’s two genders’ model… which I know is due to the fact that lately I have pretty much only see the ‘two or more genders’ definition being used in explicit opposition to the bullshit idea that there are only two genders (boys and girls). And by extension of that I’m not really sure I agree with the idea that the definition ‘foot notes other genders’ (because if ‘two’ doesn’t mean ‘boys and girls’ but just ‘any two genders’ what genders exactly are getting foot noted?) But I think it’s worth the note that I have also seen the ‘two genders full stop’ definition being used on a personal level in explicit opposition to the idea that there are only two genders, those genders being boys and girls (stuff like ‘being attracted to two genders doesn’t mean those genders have to be boys and girls’)

Because again, especially when it’s at a personal level, it’s less an issue with the definitions in and of themselves and more an issue with shitty people being shitty. I mean, the ‘same and different genders’ and ‘two genders full stop’ definitions when applied broad scale are an issue because they are leaving a bunch of bi people out but on an ‘individual describing themself’ level I don’t think it’s inherently a problem.

And the connotations matter, absolutely. The cultural/historical/whatever context words are being used in matters. Just *helpless have wave* I dunno…. I had those thoughts.

What I really like about the ‘more than one gender’ definition is the space it leaves for ‘not entirely two’. I think that is really awesome and a really good thing. That, I think, is the main difference (when we’re talking on a broad scale level) between the ‘more than one’ and ‘two or more genders’ definition and I think that difference is meaningful.

…. so I hope that was a mildly coherent ramble ahaha.

Definitely coherent :D

Yeah you’re right that the bad thing about some definitions is just because of the way shitty people have used them!

@cyberbanditworld in reply to this post

Well, you know that “biological sex” is just as much of a social construct as gender is? Also insisting on referring to people by their biological sex is pretty transphobic, and pansexuality is not the only sexuality that includes trans and non binary people!

I don’t usually respond to posts like this, but you’ve annoyed me, so here’s a basic lesson in genetics.

Biological sex is a scientifically observable objective fact about all sexually dimorphic species, including humans. In humans, it’s determined by the presence or lack of a Y chromosome.

The possible arrangements for female chromosomes are XX, XO, and XXX.

The male chromosome arrangements are XY, XXY, and XYY (Not having an X will kill you, so there is no YO).

This has been science with Draco.

“science”

“here’s basic biology [describes middle school biology as taught from textbooks written in the 80’s or 90’s]”

Every time! *eye roll*

Via The Bisexual Index on Twitter

[Picture is a series of tweets by The Bisexual Index which read:]

This is a very interesting thread and they make some good points as to why “more than one” would be preferable to “two or more”.

I specifically dislike the “same and other genders” definition due to the way it submits to the “bi = 2″ definition and also specifies a particular gender you have to be attracted to and, in The Bisexual Index’s words, “it footnotes the other genders”. (and since the SGA discourse I really don’t trust people who use it for the whole community).

But I also feel that “more than one” and “two or more” are equally inclusive and reflective of everyone in the bi community so they can be used more interchangeably than some other definitions, though I’ll definitely consider promoting the “more than one” definition a bit more going forward.

I like “more than one” much better. Much much better. It’s the definition I use, it sounds better, it doesn’t hold the connotation of “boys and girls and maybe more”, it pulls farther away from the misguided idea that “bisexual” erases nonbinary genders. More than one, more than one, more than one.

Yeah that’s a very good point!

@cyberbanditworld in reply to this post

Well, you know that “biological sex” is just as much of a social construct as gender is? Also insisting on referring to people by their biological sex is pretty transphobic, and pansexuality is not the only sexuality that includes trans and non binary people!

I tend to abstain from tumblr discussions as I mainly use tumblr to reblog stuff that usually brings me to laugh or smile. However, I couldn’t let this reply to the harmless sharing of my own sexual ontology go by without a wall of text illustrating my disdain for the all too common hyper sensitive attacks upon queer buds by lackluster queer buds.

I just want to start by saying that yes biological sex is a social construct, I’ve read the lingual maze that is Butler as well. However, sex was constructed for discourses around the physical realities of the body, something Butler and a lot of other queer theorists are acutely aware of and do not attach sexuality or gender based phobias during the own ponderings on sex characteristic epistemes.

Anyway, I’m not really concerned with debating gender and sex theories, I’m more concerned with your knee jerk reaction to ascribe the #transphobia and #biphobia to my own personal embodiment of bisexuality I shared, something that requires a person to make themselves vulnerable to share in the first place, but I suppose this is the internet after all. I can see how you could misconstrue and infer that I’m transphobic and/or biphobic from my comment. But surely this is only possible within the confines of presumptuous inferences you have layered in an odd sensitivity to potential phobics lurking everywhere? I use biological sex to describe my own experiences and embodiment of bisexuality because I am attracted to sex characteristics such as the penis and vagina without the need of lumping qualities of gender (masculine, feminine, man, woman, trans or otherwise) upon them, simple, yeah? No idea how that harms anyone with biphobia and transphobia that simply does not exist in my sexual ontology.

Also, just in case you’re unaware, some bi-folk are only into cis-men and women, some only dig trans-men and women while others don’t bother with distinctions like that at all. The possible definitions and embodiments of sexuality are seriously as infinite as gender itself. Pansexual, polysexual, sexually fluid and bisexual people alike share this quality of infinitely possible variations. Far be it from either of us to denigrate or question people’s bisexual preferences, choices and experiences via ludicrously labeling them as bi/transphobic or otherwise. It’s honestly perplexing I have to elaborate upon the existence of eclectic ontologies pertaining to bisexuality at all to a bisexual tumblr blog.

However, clearly you’d rather attach what appears to be your personal perceptions and aspirations pertaining to the embodiment and experience of my bisexuality without so much as a passing thought about the diversity of attraction within my sexuality. Much easier to think that mine is a phobic definition than one which is equally as valid as yours and others.

To be blunt with you, my own perceptions of your character is that of a person who expects someone’s sexuality to fit into your comfortable definitions/requirements of it. And to that I say… don’t ever fucking presume to know why or how an individual’s bisexual embodiment operates with stupid accusations such as the insulting dribble you directed at me in regards to myself having phobias towards groups of people I cherish and fight for. There’s already enough conflict in the LGBT community being created by similar pettiness. I love and accept your definition, you don’t need to denigrate mine or anybody else’s through the silly desire to label those that are different and harmless (because we know there are truly harmful ones out there) to lay bare the authenticity of yours.

P.S

You calling me transphobic/biphobic is in itself situating you as biphobic.

/end_meltdown_bitch.exe

Any form of attraction that splits trans and cis women or trans and cis men into different categories as if they are different genders is transphobic. Trans women are women and so if you are attracted to the gender “women” that means cis and trans women.

Defining people by their genitals is also transphobic (and shitty to everyone really)

This doesn’t make me biphobic to point out that some bi people are transphobic.

@cyberbanditworld in reply to this post

Well, you know that “biological sex” is just as much of a social construct as gender is? Also insisting on referring to people by their biological sex is pretty transphobic, and pansexuality is not the only sexuality that includes trans and non binary people!

I don’t usually respond to posts like this, but you’ve annoyed me, so here’s a basic lesson in genetics.

Biological sex is a scientifically observable objective fact about all sexually dimorphic species, including humans. In humans, it’s determined by the presence or lack of a Y chromosome.

The possible arrangements for female chromosomes are XX, XO, and XXX.

The male chromosome arrangements are XY, XXY, and XYY (Not having an X will kill you, so there is no YO).

This has been science with Draco.

“science”

Via The Bisexual Index on Twitter

[Picture is a series of tweets by The Bisexual Index which read:]

This is a very interesting thread and they make some good points as to why “more than one” would be preferable to “two or more”.

I specifically dislike the “same and other genders” definition due to the way it submits to the “bi = 2″ definition and also specifies a particular gender you have to be attracted to and, in The Bisexual Index’s words, “it footnotes the other genders”. (and since the SGA discourse I really don’t trust people who use it for the whole community).

But I also feel that “more than one” and “two or more” are equally inclusive and reflective of everyone in the bi community so they can be used more interchangeably than some other definitions, though I’ll definitely consider promoting the “more than one” definition a bit more going forward.

JFC bisexuality is the attraction to both sexes…it’s not that hard. Sex, not gender…

You: reads a post from one of the major bisexual organisations, referring to other organisations who define bisexuality in a similar way

You: nope this is clearly all wrong

I feel a new law of the internet coming on, though I’m not sure what to call it?

Any post that states that bisexuality is the attraction to two or more genders will immediately attract several comments pointing out either ‘bi = 2’ or ‘that’s pansexuality/polysexuality’.

If you say you’re bi, and you are attracted to multiple genders, then you’re bi. If you say you’re pan, and you are attracted to multiple genders, then you’re pan.

Some bi are attracted to only 2. Some are attracted to more. It’s your definition, as a bi/pan person, that matters. Not the definitions of nonbi/nonpan people. You can even be both.

“Doesn’t the B in LGBT imply there are only 2 genders?”

I have seen this biphobic and transphobic gotcha trotted out repeatedly by trolls who can’t accept that there are more than two genders and that bi doesn’t mean two.

Do not use bisexuality as a pawn in your transphobic, nbphobic and intersexist arguments, bisexuality is the attraction to two or more genders, it does not enforce the gender binary, it does include trans and non binary people and many trans and non binary people identify as bisexual without negating their gender identity.

this is the reason i hate being bisexual and i wish i was just straight so i didn’t have to deal with you people 

also its not “biphobic” or “transphobic” to say that 

jesus christ

The community definition is attraction to two or more genders, which is inclusive to every bi person whether they are attracted to two genders, all genders or any number in between - so you are quite welcome to define your own attraction as to just two genders, or to men and women, if you so wish.

It is biphobic to insist that ALL bi people are attracted to two genders, and it’s transphobic to use that definition to invalidate trans and non-binary people.

“Bi” Means Two!

We’re all familiar with this phrase, whether we agree with it or not. So, naturally, when we hear someone say, “I’m bisexual” we hear “I’m attracted to men and women.” And that evokes many different responses.

Some people think, “Okay. So, this person could have a boyfriend or a girlfriend at some point.” Some think “So, they’re only attracted to cisgender people.”

Here’s the first thing that’s wrong with the latter phrase: I, like many other bisexuals, am non-binary and have been attracted to NB people.

The modern definition of “bisexual”, especially to accommodate identifiers such as “pansexual”, is “attraction to two or more genders.” Hence why we keep the root “bi-” there. Pansexual tends to mean “attraction to all genders.” The umbrella term for these is multisexual, “attraction to more than one gender.” The opposite is monosexual, “attraction to one gender”, an umbrella term for heterosexual and homosexual.

Here’s the second thing wrong with that assumption: a little thing called “etymological fallacy”.  It’s the argument that the modern day usage of a term should stay true to its historical meaning.

I’ve seen this fallacy used to argue that bisexual folks are transphobic. First of all, there’s nothing wrong not wanting to date NB people, unless it’s for bigoted reasons. Second of all, if bisexual did mean “I only like two genders”, that doesn’t necessarily mean only cismen and ciswomen. It could mean “[trans]women and demigirls” or “men and genderqueers” or whatever. Do you, boo!

The point of all this is we all have our reasons for choosing a label for ourselves. Maybe try not to make assumptions based on why that person chose that label. It’s a lot more complicated than you think.