What's the alternative you're suggesting? That they don't use the label that best suits them? That they don't use the definition they prefer when asked why they identify as they do? This feels sort of half baked. I get where you're going, but to what end? Suggesting they use a different definition or a different label just for convenience is pretty problematic.

You have to pay for a date.

Yeah, like I said.

I actually think it's fine to question people on their identity, the only person who can really tell you why they identify as what they identify is them. There's some nuance of course, and you don't want to pry or seem like you're trying to convince them they've used the wrong label, but I think it's fine to ask folks.

I'll try to give a good example. The context of this thread is all of us discussing the difference. It's a bit different than asking a singular person why they may have chose one over the other. A very close person to me chooses the pan label over the bi label because of a reason I personally disagree with and view as biphobic. They choose it because they don't want trans and nonbinary people who subscribe to the biphobic definition to believe they're transphobic or enbyphobic. My response to this is not "that's biphobic, you shouldn't do that." Because the only real conclusion from that would be that I'm saying "You should call yourself bisexual" which would be relabeling them. Now, this specific conversation, it vent on, and all of us having the conversation are on the same page about it all, for the most part. We all agree there is massive, massive overlap between the two and the label doesn't really matter too too much, and all of us would be fine saying we're "bi/pan" probably. If our opinions were more unaligned on the topic, it may have gone differently. Especially if this person said that I am transphobic or enbyphobic for saying I am bisexual, but that's not something they did and it's not something they believe. Also, we did all say that the flag we preferred played a bit of a role lmao. The two of us that are bi love the bi color and the the one who is pan loves the pan colors.

I guess for me, going back to the dating app analogy, I'd rather label myself what I am (bisexual) and have people who have biphobic takes that assume I am transphobic/enbyphobic pass on me than relabel myself to accommodate them. Because I don't think we'd necessarily be able to get along anyways. I think if someone is that opposed to the label found out I called myself pan instead of bi on my profile just to get into their DMs, it would also just push them further into biphobia and they'd unmatch with me anyways.

I think this is why this meme is so hilarious, bi versus pan just sort of carries on and on and rarely leads to satisfying conclusions. But I think there's beauty there, I think the queer experience is so unique and I love to learn about people and also have others learn about me. I love discussions.

So, I'll start by saying that it's pretty on brand for this meme post lol, but there are multiple definitions of bisexuality and pansexuality I find acceptable. There are some that are bullshit. I don't really subscribe to one true definition of it. I have one I use the most that I'll talk about later in this post. This is what I take issue with, see emphasis.

Bisexual is attracted to more than one gender and CAN include all the same attractions as a Pansexual.

Pansexual IS attraction to all genders.

So yeah all pansexuals are bisexual but not all bisexuals are pansexuals, they could be trans excluding, that's sufficiently vague enough that Pansexual is its own thing.

This is either biphobic by assuming bisexuals are not accepting of trans people or transphobic by viewing trans men as a different gender than cis men (same for trans women and cis women). That's why I have a problem with it. Bisexuality has never meant that.

Someone else in this thread has already mentioned the bisexual manifesto from 1990. Now, to be clear, this isn't me saying "hey, it's called the bisexual manifesto, it's the one true definition of bisexuality." (It itself even says its not.) But I find this part relevant when discussing multiple definitions.

Do not expect each magazine to be representative of all bisexuals, for our diversity is too vast. Do not expect a clear-cut definition of bisexuality to jump out from the pages. We bisexuals tend to define bisexuality in ways that are unique to our own individuality. 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. Do not assume that the opinions expressed are shared by all bisexuals, [...]

So even in 1990 it was understood by bisexuals that bisexuals did not have a single "one true definition" of bisexuality. Not to even mention pansexuality and what shape the venn diagram of the two might make.

Me, personally, the definition I use, that I feel I see many people use and also I have some bias towards because I feel it's the most satisfying is that pansexuals are attracted to traits of people without regards to gender. While bisexuals are attracted to any gender of people and may have traits they find attractive in some genders but not others. And the example I always give of this is, someone who is bi, but not pan, might find muscular women attractive, but dislike muscles on men. Meanwhile, someone who is pan would just like muscles regardless.

Another definition I use, but perhaps less useful to answer you, is that bisexuals are people who identify as bisexual. Pansexuals are people who identify as pansexual. And yes, people can identify as both or only one. I think self identification in the queer community is massively important. I have a friend who's wife came out as nonbinary. He calls himself straight. So when people ask me what his sexuality is, I say he's straight. Is there a part of me that believes in some technical, theoretical sense that he should consider labeling himself as something else? Sure, yeah, because his wife is nonbinary now, but that's not really my business unless he asked me about it.

I mean, practically, if someone tells me they're bi or pan, it doesn't really change my view of them. Like there's not really any practical difference insofar as something I would need to know to treat them somehow. Like if I'm trying to flirt with someone, and if I was a man, and that person I find out is a a lesbian, then I wouldn't. But if they're bi or if they're pan, it doesn't change that.

There is a difference, I'm not saying there isn't, and I'm not saying we should only use one if the two. I'm just saying the need for clarifying is overblown. If I'm curious why they picked one over the other, I might ask, but again, it's not super critical for anything.

You've (unintentionally) fallen for a biphobic talking point.

First two are biphobic.

• Bisexuals are attracted to people because of gendered characteristics, pansexuals are attracted to people regardless of gendered characteristics (not really sure what this one means, different wording of the previous one?)

As an example of this, a bisexual might find muscular women attractive, but not muscular men, but pansexuals find muscles attractive or not on all people. This is the definition I use.

• Bisexuals are attracted to more than one gender, pansexuals are attracted to all genders

The thing I find troublesome about this is that it can overly lump people into bisexuality. A common definition for lesbian today is someone who is not a man who is attracted to people who aren't men. If that's your definition of lesbian and bisexual than you're saying lesbians are bisexual. I prefer to say bisexual is attracted to all genders.

• Bisexuals are monogamous, pansexuals are polyamorous

Weird seeing this because traditionally the harmful stereotype is that bisexuals need two lovers. Either way, this is not a good definition.

• Bisexuals like the bi flag, pansexuals like the pan flag

This is one that's silly, but kind ends up being true sometimes. Bi and pan are incredibly overlapped. Not all bi people are pan and not all pan people are bi, yes, but there's a lot of overlap. So a lot people in the middle just pick the flag they prefer.

Also I will die on the hill that pansexuality is not a subset of bisexuality. Not all pansexuals are bisexual.

I've also seen plenty a bisexual who hate the term pansexual and thinks it's redundant because they don't acknowledge the nuance.

Sort of an odd thing to say while also missing the nuance between the two and parroting biphobic points.

That's not the difference.

No.

No.

Yeah, you definitely did not learn the right lesson from this.