No Stupid Questions

I think most people use them interchangably, I call myself bi due to it being a more well-known term and the flag being prettier

In practical terms, the biggest difference is the flag.

Really, not much, but there are some ideological ones sometimes. It's a label based on personal identification. Some people say that only pansexuals are trans-inclusive when that's not the case.

In some bisexual communities, bisexuality is defined as loving 2 or more genders. Not necessarily (but usually) men and women. Additionally, some bisexual people will date multiple genders, but not all of them (maybe they have specific preferences, whatever).

Being trans myself, I find it off-putting when pansexuals describe their sexuality as "I love men, women, and trans people" because that's incredibly othering (to me as a binary trans person), but it seems like people say it less now than they did in 2012 when I was a baby tran. It's weird to separate us entirely rather than viewing us as just another "type" of man or woman.

For a NB person that doesn't apply since they're neither a man nor a woman, but I can't speak to how NB people feel about that phrase.

Echoing other lemmings, there's basically no difference. There js a certain niche who seem to think that pansexual is more trans inclusive, but that attitude doesn't align with almost all bisexuals opinions on the matter, or with the history of how the bisexual community has been accepting and collaborating with the trans community since pretty much the birth of both communities.

The delightful verilybitchie, who is both bisexual and trans, has a bunch of good video on the history of bisexuality, trans stuff, and biphobia*. They are defintely worth watching!

/* it's pretty hard to hear 'bisexuals exclude trans people' and not feel like that's an example of biphobia.

There's a lot I don't really like about pansexuality, which is why I don't use the label. In my head, a transwoman is a woman, and a transman is a man, so I don't see any difference in my love for them than my love for a cis woman or a cis man. Non-binaries fit outside that spectrum, for sure, but they're still people with masculine and/or feminine traits, and I don't understand why there needs to be an extra label just to include them. Shouldn't they be included always? I guess the biggest thing that would be excluded would be people who don't show either masculine or feminine traits. I've never met or seen one, so I guess I don't know if I can be attracted to one, or if the distinction even exists.

I understand that other bisexuals may have different tastes in their partners, but we don't have different labels for each level of masculine/feminine attraction. The bisexual who prefers femme men and women is considered just as bisexual as the one who prefers masc men and women, or the one who likes both traits equally. I just don't understand why there's an implicit exclusion of trans people from that attraction, such that we need a new label to add explicit inclusion.

I refer to myself as pan for two reasons. First, I believe that gender is a spectrum and there's more than two of them. Two, to me bisexual implies equal attraction to both the masculine and feminine, and I'm less attracted to the masculine than I am to the feminine end of the scale.

Really, pansexual is being attracted to the the person, regardless of their gender identity.

Usually, most Pansexuals don't have gender as a factor on their attraction, many Bisexuals do. Bisexual has a more ample definition.

There are people who date multiple but not all genders for example, but there's a lot overlap between both communities. And there's also more plurisexualities (the + in Bi+, like polisexuality and omnisexuality) who also overlap. People sometimes use a specific one to share details about they experience their sexuality.

There's nothing wrong with using either one or all, but we need to respect everyone's choice about how they refer to their own sexuality.

This is so far over my head - i don't understand it. I know my comment will likely be taken as offensive or condescending, but it's really not the intent. I am so confused by sexuality/gender discussions. I don't understand having a label that's inclusive or exclusive of who someone will or won't date. Doesn't that change based on the people you meet? If you label one way, you meet someone you find attractive, you have chemistry, and then you find that they have parts that don't fit your label, what do you do? I guess it's part of dating - to weed out what you're usually not attracted to? I partnered/married young, so that aspect of dating wasn't openly discussed in the same way- we didn't have the common words to describe like we have today. Also, being hetero and having mostly hetero friends, i guess we didn't spend time thinking about how our relationships were similar or different from each others. I definitely understand putting descriptions of any kind of love out there so young people know they're not alone, but beyond that I'm lost.

Practically nothing, realistically, in every day conversation. The only difference that might exist is that a person could be attracted to men, and women but not any other gender. Like maybe they don't like non-binary, gender fluid or genderless folk. I used to say I was Bi, but I use Pan now just because I 100% don't care about gender; everyone is sexy.

One woman told me that she identifies as bisexual, even though she is attracted to all genders including non-binary, because she has two "modes" of dating. When dating women, she prefers to be the pursuer. When dating men, she prefers to be the pursued. I'm not sure which way she usually went with enbies.

My sister used to identify as bisexual. Now she identifies as pansexual. Why? She says she feels it more encompasses trans inclusion, as well.