Bisexual vs. Pansexual.

Allow me to speak on these points:

• "It's never okay to call someone who uses microlabels bisexual."
• "It's never okay to call a bisexual one of the microlabels."

I identify as bisexual and pansexual simultaneously. They're not mutually exclusive because they're somewhat arbitrary neologisms with blurry semantic distinctions. No bit of language is rooted in stone, let alone more modern terms used to describe a very personalized matter like sexual orientation. I always say that how personal you are to a label is the best metric to know how adequately it describes you. Do you feel "bisexual" is a relatable term? Congrats, you're bi. Do you feel "pansexual" is a relatable term? Congrats, you're pan. And me? I use the terms in a linguistic context that makes them not mutually exclusive and core parts of my sexual identity, so I do want to correct that part (even though I know you didn't make this). Otherwise, however, I think it's a good post, and just make sure at the end of the day to emphasize respect and refrain from policing identities like a turd. Anyone who does that should touch grass ASAP.

Bi has a better color scheme

You know, relationships between two bisexuals never last, because they always go bi-bi.

Likewise, airlines always make sure to never pair up a pansexual captain and first officer, lest the flight involve a pan-pan situation.

I feel like this is kinda busted in a taxonomic sense. My understanding an "umbrella" in categorization is that things underneath it are unified by fulfilling specific criteria, such that you can call them the same in that sense. Gorillas and chimpanzees are different species, but they're both primates and can be referred to as such. Primates and rodents are different orders, but they're both mammals and can be referred to as such. Rectangle and square, boat and ship, all that jazz. I wonder what the utility of using that kind of hierarchy is in the case that you can't group them like that, which seems to be what the graphic is saying.

I suppose the counter argument is that it doesn't need to be consistent if it feels right? I've heard the sentiment (on here, as it happens!) that labels ought to function more as beacons than walls, to attract other people who feel generally the same way rather than exclude people on a more rigid "objective" basis. Still, I feel like any attempt to categorize like this throws that out the window by necessity.

sorry to dump all this where it probably wasn't expected but this really got my brain turning on the matter and would like to hear what other people think

theyre all the same

actually the difference is that bisexuals favor a STR based build, whereas pansexuals usually focus more on DEX.

Is there a specific word to describe someone who is bi or pansexual, but leans towards a certain fuzzy range of gender expression? To give an example, being attracted to girls and feminine men, but not traditionally “masculine” men.

I guess that would count as omnisexual, but I’m not entirely sure.

I'm pan. But I'm never going to explain that term to anyone as long as there remains the more popular understanding of the term bi (especially my parents).

So I'm bi for convenience.