Transcript
Lynnette: On The BiCast, we strive to be about, for and by our community. One way we do this is by reading comment threads from our groups on Facebook. This month’s Bi Thread fits neatly into our show on labels. The question is:
John: How many here make a distinction between pansexual and bisexual? I ask because a lot of what I’ve read here lately seems to trend towards working to update the definition of bisexual; one who is not only sexual attracted to males and females, but is attracted to all on the gender spectrum. What I’m getting is that there appears to be a lot of people who identify as bisexual but fit the more modern label of pansexual but do not identify as such. Please correct me if I’m wrong with my understanding. I’d also like to here from bisexuals who find their attraction more binary.
Lynnette: While I primarily am attracted to cis gendered men and women, I don’t limit myself with that definition. I like the use of the term BI (meaning bisexual inclusive) as an umbrella term for the many types of multiple gender attractions that exist and I like “bisexual” defined as the attraction to same and other genders. People are welcome to use whatever more specific labels & terms they wish to use to define themselves under the BI umbrella IMO. It’s a big family tree with many branches…
John: I definately don’t experience attraction in a binary way. It is always on a person to person basis and open to all genders. But I came out as bisexual in 1989 so the idea of “pansexual” was not around at all and I continue to use the word “bisexual”. The other aspect of this is because we catagorize people into male and female it is easy to say to oneself “I am bisexual” not understanding that what you are attracted to is not specifically “gender” so I think the terms blur into one another.
Lynnette: I define bi as being attracted to my own gender and people of other genders. Which is basically the same thing as pansexual, just with a different slant I guess.
I did almost start calling myself pansexual at one point last year, but for some reason am just more comfortable with bi. Which is maybe funny, since as a teen I had some friends who were pan but didn’t know anyone who called themselves bi.
John: In my opinion, you’ve got it twisted. Its not that “there appears to be a lot of people who identify as bisexual but fit the more modern label of pansexual”. The reality is, bisexuals, as a community, have been inclusive of all genders for as long as Ive been a part of the community (more than 25 years). There are a lot of people who identify as pansexual who are co-opting how bisexuals have identified as a community since forever. Many bisexuals who choose not to identify as pansexual, simply don’t see the point in changing labels for something not nearly as well understood, but basically meaning the same thing.
The only real value I see in the term pansexual, is that it does communicate specifically that a “particular person” has potential for being attracted to trans, and other gendered people. “Bisexual”, while the community has always been expressive and welcoming of potential attraction to trans and other non-cisgendered people, not all bisexual people are actually attracted to non-cisgendered and transgender people. So, if someone wants to send a “clear” message that they are specifically attracted to non-cis and trans people, pansexual does that.
In my experience, bisexual simply means that I am attracted to who Im attracted to, regardless of their gender…but, in MY case, not “because” of their gender. Pansexuals often seem to be gender focused in their attractions.
Lynnette: Maybe I just knew a different group of pansexuals when I was learning about the LGBT community? The pansexuals I knew as a teen seemed to think that gender was beside the point, and were hardly gender focused.
Which leads me to ask, could the definitions we use have to do with what generation we’re from? This is something I’ve wondered about before.
John: Im not saying pansexuals all seem to be gender focused, Im saying that the ones Ive met often “seem” gender focused.
I do agree that there is likely a youth element, rather than a generational one. Also, in my limited experience, its usually twenty-somethings, and younger, college kids, or budding radicals, who like to focus on dissecting the bisexual vs pansexual thing. Whenever it comes up, people tend to go to the dictionary definition of bi as a way of “proving” what bisexuality means. LoL…. Its funny to me, because the dictionary definition is also generally applied to plants and microbes. Whatever is found in the dictionary is irrelevant. Webster doesn’t define ME, or my COMMUNITY. I do and WE do, respectively. If webster, or anyone else, is interested they should listen to the communities definition of itself, and the individuals within that community. Anything less than that is an exercise of imposing privilege, an attempt to disempower, and an act of disrespect.
Lynnette: Some straight girl tried to tell me today that pan people were attracted to everybody-everybody they see at any given time, they must be attracted to- and that bi people just could be attracted to anybody. But in reality I would say we’re all non monosexual, and however you want to define yourself is correct. There isn’t anything that unites all bi or all pan people that doesn’t also unite all non monosexual people
John: My attractions are not binary and never have been. I’m comfortable identifying as bi and pan and fluid and queer. I take issue with the assertion that bi-never-meant-pan-or-fluid-and-has-always-been-a-label-for-those-who-think/act-in-binary-ways. BS! For one thing it is a judgment that assumes that bi is backward, less evolved; who needs that kind of judgment from/of/to anyone? The people i feel most comfortable with have ALWAYS identified bi as an inclusive term; encompassing possible attractions to people who identify in a variety of ways, including m and f. Talking about m v f being all-there-is is much to simple, yes; it’s a default/shorthand that is unfortunate. Pan works in certain circles but not when I’m communicating to people who have yet to grasp the limits of binary. And there are trans people who identify as m and transpeople who identify as f, more than they id as trans. No one can say that there is one correct word that is the best, especially not for others, other than oneself.
Lynnette: I think opening up a dialog with pan identified people has begun to heal some of the misinformation about bisexuals. It shouldn’t be a war since we are all under the same umbrella. I find that many pan identified people are younger and haven’t learned much of the history yet. So its to us to teach it.
John: I remember coming of age in the late 70s and having met many cross dressers, drag queens, and transvestites who lived their everyday lives as either FtM or MtF. Every now and then Id meet someone who had figured out how to get hormones, but surgeries were unheard of. The people I met either “identified” as male or female, regardless of what was in their pants/skirt. These were the folk who told me about Stonewall. They were the ones who were leading the fights against Anita Bryant, et al. They literally were the ones who provided the structure for gay culture, from what I could see. When the bi community began putting together bi conferences, at least from the first ones I went to, they were welcomed. They came in their heels, their drag king soft packing, whatever made them feel like themselves. They were not only welcome, they were doing workshops, performances, etc. Gender Benders wasn’t a bad word then, nor was Trannie, Gender Fuck, etc.
Now, Im not even sure if they “fit” in the term trans. Im hearing about how Drag Culture is an embarrassment to trans folk. Im hearing how bisexuals, who welcomed them, supported them, and them us, and subsequently all of gaydom, should just give up what we’ve worked for and take up a new “word”….because it is etymologically more accurate a definition. The word/label argument is just so dismissive of whats really important. Literally, Ive watched as people shouted at each other with frothy spittle spewing from their mouthes as if they were rabid over this. I just walk away. Its divisive, unfocused, and without a lot of merit. Like someone said, “just accept people however they wish to be identified and maybe ask them to share what it means to them when they use a particular label”. Life would be so much easier.
Thanx for taking me back….
Lynnette: I see a difference. To me, being bisexual means loving men and women. Pansexual means loving all possible genders or gender expressions. I am bisexual.
John: I second that.
Being bisexual means loving and being attracted to both females and males.
Being pansexual means loving and being attracted to all possible genders and or gender expressions.
I am Bisexual.
However, I openly accept all people as they are, as friends.
Lynnette: I am bisexual and I find that definition of bisexuality to be completely wrong. But that is my view. I do not presume to define it for someone else. And I think that trying to do so is a mistake. And yes if I were to use pansexual, it would accurate. But I will always identify as bisexual. That is the word that seems to stick in everyone’s craw and many are using erroneously to describe the difference between bi and pan. It means the same thing. I will always be bisexual and look forward to the day when we all understand it sounds just as good as pansexual.
DEFINITION OF BISEXUALITY: I call myself bisexual because I acknowledge that I have in myself the potential to be attracted – romantically and/or sexually – to people of more than one sex and/or gender, not necessarily at the same time, not necessarily in the same way, and not necessarily to the same degree. ~ from “Selected Quotes” by Robyn Ochs
John: Robyn Ochs definition is OK, but IMO it reinforces stereotypes by trying to refute them and that part has no place in a general definition. That is part of a discussion with an individual about their individual experience. By using her personal definition as a general definition we are unwittingly defining a certain type of bisexuality as superior/other types as unacceptable or problematic. I know this absolutely is not the intent, but society has grown & changed since she wrote her definition, and we need to encourage that change with our words.
Bisexual means attracted to same and other sexes. Plain and simple- That is the only definition I see broad consensus for… Everything else is up to the individual, so one needs to talk to people, not make assumptions.
Lynnette: I like Robyns definition and support its broad acceptance by the bisexual community overall. I like it because, like the bisexual manifesto, it does, indeed, put to bed the mythos and stereotypes used to attack, and stereotype our community. She is one of our hardest working leaders, and is not someone who constructs things on a whim. Im sure she worked WITH community to construct that definition, as opposed to just sticking it out there. She is a brilliant woman, and I applaud the tireless work she has done over the years, since her days at Harvard. There are few who are as diligent, and caring, as her.
John: I gave my opinion, based on my own feelings, my personal definition of what I am.
Lynnette: Robyn’s definition is more then ok.What this above definition feels like to me is the pansexual group has figured out that when they use a binary definition of bisexuality to show the difference between bisexuality and pansexuality they are in fact being disrespectful, offensive and wrong in trying to explain bisexuality as being only attracted to men and women. This is way to calm ruffled feathers while still proving how they are different. In my opinion.
John: Maybe a way to look at it is to think bisexual communities all under one umbrella. Many of us put an X in front of “identified bisexual” to show our place under it. Its a strength that we all come here with our own identities, histories, and sexualities. Pan identified bisexual is but one way to define ourselves. But really, this umbrella is big enough for all of us. And it requires listening and mutual respect because that’s how communities work.
Lynnette: The other terms that are referenced in the initialism LGBTQ are seen as inclusive umbrellas that don’t require either conformity to a specific platonic ideal of “what is L or G or T or Q” or changing the umbrella label to become a perfect complete one-word representation of precise attraction. As has been said by many before me, there’s already a P in the B.
John: This is it for me too.United we stand. This isn’t a mere slogan. This is the reality of being part of a gregarious species whose members need to find commonality with each other. This is the reality of being in a world where numbers matter – if identity didn’t matter, there would be no need to Come Out.
But the benefits of using a broad umbrella term mean that it is not a good thing to reject it on the grounds that it has “bad connotations” that it quite simply doesn’t, not to the people who are standing under it yelling “Hey! Come on in! It’s dry under here! We have cookies!”.
And the reason I get so incensed over this particular issue, personally, is I’ve seen too many people seize on the multiplicity of non-monosexual identities as a reason to discount us: our numbers appear smaller; people are accusing those of us who are inclusive of being exclusive; because the labels are in flux and frankly confusing to anyone who isn’t steeped in it, it’s assumed that we are ourselves confused about who we are. And I’ve seen too many people, mostly either outside the bisexual community or informed by things that came from outside the bisexual community (or by some people inside the community who say exclusive rather than inclusive things) use the word bisexual to say bad things about my community and by extension about me – to say that I’m hostile to trans*folk, that I’m confused, that I am being exclusive.
Lynnette: To answer the original post in many less words than I typically use:
Bisexual and pansexual makes sense, bisexual or pansexual doesn’t. The inclusive definition of bisexual isn’t the update, it’s old-school — the exclusionary definition is the one being forced on the community by people who are outside the community and/or people who think they can avoid biphobia via self-erasure.
And I’m in my 40s and was bisexual (and not trans-exclusionary) a decade before the good and useful word “cisgender” was coined, and two decades before the NYT called us all liars on the front page — which seems to coincide with the beginning of the historical push to redefine bisexuals into something we’re not. Now, correlation != causation, but the more I think about it, the more I feel they have to be connected in some way, even if that connection is nothing more than two expressions of one zeitgeist.
John: So now I’ll say what’s not being said: some of the comments dance around it, but I will dash Gayly forward here. Normitivity. When the model bisexual is white & lives behind a white picket fence, the model leaves so many of us out. Even addressing stereotypes is problematic because many of us don’t want to be normalized. It was an undercurrent of the NYT piece. You had to watch the slideshow to see our colors. The article is hunting the white male cis male though. I’ve been under our umbrella long enough to know that most of us don’t subscribe to bi-normitivity as a goal. But pansexual is a way people call that out.
Lynnette: I am appreciative some of our leading activists responded to this thread. I am more inclined to believe i will get a better picture of what bisexuality is for the community at large from them. I already know what is means to me. And it is not exclusive.
John: I was at an anti-bullying conference last week and the keynote speaker said, “hurt people hurt people.” I remember that now because i feel sorrow that there is such infighting about our language amongst people who are so close, or can be; in our sensibilities and our goals. As an elder (a Sixties person in my sixties), I am concerned that our history not be forgotten. Some of my most transformative experiences were traveling to various cities and campuses around the U.S. twenty years ago and finding bi and trans people in families and marriages together, before these relationships were sanctioned or endorsed by the state or the gay movement. My experience was that, though we had problems and made mistakes, the support between those who identified as bi and those who identified as trans (and those who id’d as both) was tremendously fierce and beautiful. I just want that to be known. We used the “pan” word back then, and a number of other words. We have learned to talk about multiplicities of gender much more in the past two decades, let’s keep on learning, and supporting/respecting each other as we go!
Lynnette: “Imagine the LGBT community as a piece of paper with something written on it: perhaps it’s the famous Queer Agenda. It’s written in standard style, with some blank space around it. Your job is to mail this piece of paper, to get this message to a recipient who can do something with it.
Now someone tells you that the paper is too big to fit in the envelope. It’s already smaller than the papers that are already in there, but hey, you really need to get this delivered. So you cut off the bottom third.
Nope, they tell you, still too wide. So you cut off the blank spaces on the sides.
Nope, they say. Still too big. So you keep cutting.
Pretty soon, you’re cutting off parts of the words, and even whole sentences.
After a while, you’ve forgotten that the point of putting the paper in the envelope was not to get the paper in however you could, but to get the words read by the person you’re mailing it to.
You’ve confused the medium with the message, and willingly mangled the message so it will fit the medium.
So did your message actually get across? Or did all you accomplish was to send the meta-message that since you’re willing to cut off anything they might not like, it’s OK to cut you off too?”
John: your comments about cutting things to fit is such a good analogy to me trying to defend bisexuality @BisexualBatman on twitter. Talk about having to cut and reduce stuff!! It often troubles me what I cannot say that needs to be said. But then again, developing the art of communicating needed info to the world (or what itty slice of it I reach) in a form that is accessible to modern culture seems invaluable.
Lynnette: Okay…here’s one for you: Bisexual can be defined as an attraction to both [majority] genders, but does not exclude an attraction to other genders, which is defined as being pansexual. While I identify as bisexual, and am attracted to men and women, I have dated pre- and post-operative trans people…and certainly do not wish to make it sound as if I have anything but the utmost respect for them, and for their struggles to make a place for themselves in the world at large and within our communities.
John: I tend to agree with the consensus of this thread. I am bisexual. I am attracted to people. It would be weird to only be attracted to a single gender or sex. I know it is normal for a lot of people to only be attracted to a single sex and/or gender but I just don’t get it. Terms come and go but Bisexuality is the term that stays. I see all the nonmonosexual identities as being under the bisexual umbrella.
Lynnette: I am bisexual, and I am attracted to people regardless of gender. I have never jelled with the term pansexual, it doesn’t fit me.
John: have people on this thread read Julie Serano’s and Shiri Eisner’s blogs and books on this? Just wondering. Picked up Serano’s “Excluded” again today and am blown away again by how relevant she is to everything we’ve been discussing here!!
Lynnette: My bisexuality is very much binary. Naturally, I’m aware that the gender spectrum is not binary, that there is plenty in between, but I’m simply not attracted to that in-between.
John: this is a Serano excerpt on a related issue, – supporting trans people. Shealso writes extensively about how bi is NOT binary to her and how we all use words to communicate and miscommunicate in this culture.
Lynnette: I have read Serano’s blogs on the subject but not the book yet, and Eisner’s blogs and book are pretty high up on my list of influences — top 5, certainly. Aud Traher’s impassioned blogs about what’s wrong with “Hearts Not Parts” should be required reading.
John: I was looking for trans umbrellas to post today. Just like the Bi one, is ain’t a folding Tote umbrella but a big picnic table kind. I always try to include everyone, but just last week at a Meetup, I got rightly called out for talking shop at a social event. Sometimes its just as simple as not talking politics to welcome others under the umbrella. A great possibly bisexual American said, “sitting at the table doesn’t make you a diner”. So really, it come down to all of us sitting under an umbrella at the picnic table and making sure that everyone is fed. Sure, everybody likes something different, but that just how it is.
Lynnette: I identify as queer, pan, and a lesbian-identified bisexual. That’s my thing. I’m not about to tell someone else what to call themselves.
John: I identify as bisexual. It tells you all you need to know until you want to know me better. Then we can talk about more personal descriptive terms if you and I wish.
Lynnette: I think that the metaphor of bisexual being the over community identity label, while pansexual is one of many personal identity labels, and actually, the current generatuon of college kids is more likely to use multisexual, anthrosexual, and new words are being made up on Tumblr every month. As he says. “Community identity labels, on the other hand, do not serve as nor are they intended to be precise descriptions of every member of the community. Rather, it’s a broad and inclusive description that people use so we can find each other and for political muscle once we do.
So we can find each other.
Personal identity labels serve a vital function for individuals: they describe my difference and give me a space in which to be unique.”
John: This is vital because the label wars are incredibly self-destructive to our community. In the last 30 years, while the LGT community has received $487,677,799 in funding, the bi community has received a grand total of $85.356. How did they do it? By going as unified groups and presenting their case to the funding bodies, while we were wasting our time arguing over what to call ourselves.
We need to unite under the community identity label of bisexual, so the funding groups know that there are a LOT of us. Then people can use whatever personal identity label they want, just as gay men go as a untied group when they are asking for money, but then call themselves bears, twinks, leather men, etc., when they are hanging out
Do we want to argue about terminology? Or do we want to do something about the 45% of bi women who have considered or attempted suicide, the 35% of bi men, the 25% of bi people who are on food stamps, etc.?
Lynnette: A quick comment about framing. I’ve been moving away from the idea of a “bisexual umbrella” and toward viewing bisexual, pansexual, queer, omnisexual, heteroflexibile, homoflexible, st8ish, gayish, sapiosexual, just sexual, no label, etc. as a CONSTELLATION of identities that occupy a region of identity space and constitute what I’m referring to as “the middle sexualities.” It’s clear at my programs that many present use more than one of these words simultaneously (I, for example, identify as bisexual, pansexual and queer.) I’ve been saying in my programs that each of these identity words is precious to the person using that word to self-identify, and that if you ask 100 people who identify as any one of these EXACTLY that they mean you’ll get a wide range of definitions, and I’ve been encouraging us to respect one another’s identities and not engage in horizontal hostility (as Loraine so brilliantly quoted, “hurt people hurt people.” We’ve all been hurt and marginalized and we’ll all do a lot better if we don’t insist on consensus or conformity or in our choices — or definitions — of our identities. Let’s instead embrace our amazing creativity and — when someone shares one of their identity words with us — ask them to tell us more about what that word means to them.
And now back to my “to do” list as I’m packing to leave for another tour. Tomorrow: Wesleyan University.
John: Thanks for pointing out that people’s identities are precious to them, and that is true. However, it is also true, that most years the non-monsexual community gets ZERO dollars in funding. My concern with your constellation idea is that it puts equal weight to these other Personal Identity Labels. If a census taker asks “what are you” and someone says “I am anthrosexual” or whatever new Tumblr word was just invented yesterday, and refuses to ALSO label as bisexual, they will conclude that there are not very many bisexuals and we do not deserve funding. The Community Identity Label of bisexual, versus Personal Identity Label of whatever fits you best, works to get us the funding we need to address the fact of the high rates of suicide in our community, the high rates of physical and sexual abuse directed against us, the high rates of poverty in our community, etc. Of course, there might be other solutions to this problem. Can anyone suggest one?
Lynnette: I’ve never argued against personal identity labels, only against slicing and dicing and mincing the entire Bisexual community into smaller and smaller bits by repudiating the community label, the B in LGBT, on fallacious pretenses. It becomes especially troubling to me when I see people who are not part of the community — straight allies, and people who identify as Gay — telling me that there need to be not only additional personal labels, but additional community labels, as if there is a pressing need for a Pansexual community and a Multisexual community and an Anthrosexual community and a Trisexual community that are *separate and significantly different in attitudes and needs* from the Bisexual community.
When a person who identifies as Straight starts telling me that Bisexual does not represent the community because some college LGBT resource center’s website says “LGBTQQIAP” and therefore Pansexual is so different that it needs its own letter? When a person who identifies as Gay tells me that identifying as Bisexual means that I am not supporting non-binary identities? I see red. Fire shoots out my eyes. And I start asking, “What is your motivation for this? How do you gain by splitting my community, and by driving a wedge between the B and the T?”
John: Yes, I agree with the idea that what we need is firstly, a unified group and secondly, something that is quickly understood and recognized by the greater world. The second part is what makes bisexual seem to be the best option. Though there are many misconceptions about its meaning, most people have at least heard of it and have a general idea that it means capable of attraction to more than one gender. The reasons for the misconceptions, and the disowning of the term, as far as I’ve been able to discern, is the result of general prejudices against non-monosexuals. As people hated on the concept they threw all kinds of negative connotations at the word. The most direct path, that I can see, to healing and funding is Pride. Ownership of the term will lead to pride and pride will lead to more ownership etc. Meanwhile, yes, everyone needs to honor and respect everyone’s self ID. Often, showing our pride in being bisexual has a great effect on those around us. Insisting on our definition of the word, though always with respect, welcoming anyone who wants to ID otherwise, to these pages and other bisexual spaces, and letting them see here, and in articles, blogs, responses to the press, to posts on social media, correcting mis-information and showing pride in “Bisexual” I think will get us at least on a positive path towards greater recognition and understanding.
Lynnette: I really object to the idea that pansexual is the “more modern” identity and all of us old folk who still identify as bisexual need to get with the program! Some bisexual people are more gender-focused (and binary focused) while others are more inclined to think of gender as beside the point. ‘Though I am attracted to whole people (not just body parts) gender does not seem to be “beside the point” on an individual basis. My wife’s womanliness is an essential aspect of who she is (and, as a ‘trans* woman, she gets really irritated with anyone who would view her as a “third gender” or “other.”) When I’ve been with men, their masculinity was part of the attraction too. ‘Though I think I could have the potential to be attracted to someone (cis or trans*) whose gender identity was more fluid or non-specific, that’s truly hypothetical, since I’m monogamous. But certainly, if gender matters to the person for whom I feel attraction, then it matters to me!
John: The fact is that we are but a small community within our overall society. That overall society barely accepts LGBT as an entity; those who would add more and more letters risk diluting the message to the point where the rest of humanity just takes a look at the list of letters, and…laughs. At the first laugh, or the second, we lose all we have gained. So, call yourself Queer, Pansexual, Asexual, Polysexual, or whatever else, but if you insist on adding your new letters to the existing four, you are helping to kill the message.
Lynnette: When people say “LGBTQIAAWTFBBQ” they are most likely not laughing *with* us.
John: I’m not fond of the ever lengthening letter list either but I’d also rather not exclude anyone the same way I’ve felt excluded when I just see the words Gay & Lesbian plastered across resources and organisation names as though that’s close enough.
For the library, when writing collection policies I tend to use LGBTQIA and queer interchangeably to get the point across and help insure that asexual and intersex materials won’t be overlooked. I like GSM or GSD too but I know there have been issues expressed about them and fewer people know them. Most people know some iteration of LGBT so it has that going for it at least.
(note: GSM stands for Gender and Sexual Minorities; GSD for Gender and Sexual Diversities)
Lynnette: In my twenties my life was very serendipitous and I loved that time, life just spontaneously unfolded. Then in my 30’s I began to face the worst of prejudices and really needed support and could not immediately find it. If we really want to help others and ourselves we need to unite in a very real way.
Links:
Excluded: Making Feminist and Queer Movements More Inclusive
Harrie Farrow: Bisexual verses Pansexual
Eponymous Fliponymous: Inclusive v. Exclusive: or, Mincing Bisexual Part Two
Slicing Off The Margins, or, Twirlip of the Mists
To Find Each Other, or, You And Me And Us
Aud Traher: <3′s not Parts is Body and Fat Shaming
Hearts Not Parts Makes me Want to Puke