You can’t erase a sexuality that shouldn’t exist to begin with. Pansexuality has always erased bisexuality and is a damaging identity. If you could give me one, singularly ONE, definition of pansexuality that wasn’t biphobic, homophobic, or transphobic, I might believe that pansexuality is different. But you literally can’t, because their isn’t one.
“Hearts Not Parts” is assuming any LGB person is just out to date someone for their genitalia.
“Attracted to personality and not gender” is just assuming that people are just going seeing the first person of a gender they are attracted to and are immediately thinking of sleeping with them or dating them without getting to know the person. It also assumes no one has standards but you.
“Well we would date trans people”. If a man is still straight if he dates a trans woman, and a woman is still straight if she dates a trans man, why are bi people automatically pan for being willing to date trans people?
“Well, we would date non-binary people”. So would straight people, gay people, and lesbians. There is no sign above people’s heads saying they are non-binary.
“We don’t have gender preferences though”. That was already covered in so many bisexual sources it’s not even fucking funny at this point. Please check out @cowardly-bisexual if you need more proof, they have all the fucking sources you could ask for.
“We just don’t see gender though”. That’s such a fucking lie. Everyone sees gender. You see gender. I see gender, everyone sees gender.
“But bi means two”. Listen, pansexuality meant you would fuck “all”. And all meant everyone and EVERYTHING. Including animals, children, and inanimate objects. Let’s not start with roots right now because you’ll lose.
And if you really want to try to bring up “pansexual sources”, one of the oldest sources of “pansexuality” was a bi woman who would date interacially. She was called pan strictly because she would date black people.
Now please. Give me a definition of pansexuality that isn’t one of these.
