Could someone please explain the difference between bisexual, omnisexual, polysexual, and pansexual. I’m not trying to be rude just trying to figure things out.
If you’re multi-attracted (particularly a minority m-spec identity such as pan, ply, or omni) and spend enough time on Tumblr, you’ve probably seen this meme:
Though this image is often posted on m-spec solidarity posts as a show of support, it is not without its detractors. The most common criticism I’ve seen of it (besides the usual exclusionist rhetoric, of course) is that while it is a nice sentiment, it doesn’t do anything to actually explain what the differences between these identities ARE.
I’m not here to talk about that particular criticism today, though I do think it has some merit. I’m here to talk about an issue I feel this criticism is a microcosm of: the obsession with defining m-spec identities in opposition to each other.
Let me explain what I mean. A common theme among wrong (or at least highly controversial) definitions of pansexuality, is the idea that pansexuality must be fundamentally distinct from bisexuality in some way for it to be a valid orientation. “It’s like bisexuality, BUT I’m attracted to enbies”; “It’s like bisexuality, BUT I don’t have a preference”. These definitions not only grossly misrepresent bisexuality, they also can be exclusionary to people in our community. A similar impulse occurs within the omnisexual community; the most common definition of omnisexuality is “like pansexual, BUT you can have a preference”. (As I’ve covered in another editorial, this is a misrepresentation of pansexuality; pansexual people can and do have preferences).
I understand where this impulse comes from. We have been told time and time again that labels are “redundant” or “unnecessary” if their description is too similar to another established label. However, this is simply not true. Labels are a form of self expression, not discrete boxes that we must sort people into. Many people choose to identify as more than one label, and that is perfectly okay. By insisting that each label must have no overlap with any other or it is unnecessary, we are depriving people of the ability to pick which labels they feel best describe them, and the ability to feel their identity represents the individual way they experience sexuality. It’s important that we leave people the freedom to interpret each label in their own way, and decide which one, or ones, best represents them.
Recently, my family completed the show Schitt’s Creek. I had not known much about it prior, only hearing that it was good and contained some LGBT+ characters. However, when I actually sat down to watch it, I was shocked. Schitt’s Creek does something I have never seen before in a mainstream piece of media - they explicitly confirmed, with no room for ambiguity, that David Rose is pansexual.
As someone used to representation being confirmed after the fact in interviews with actors or writers (see: Deadpool, Klaus Hargreeves, and Lando Calrissian), the explicit confirmation in text that David is pan was a welcome surprise. This isn’t just representation made for pan people; it’s also an attempt to educate the general public about what pansexuality means, and legitimizes it as a real orientation that is not only present in online communities. But for many people, there was a problem. The way pansexuality is explained.
While explaining to another character his son’s sexual orientation, David’s father states that David is pansexual because he is attracted to “men, women, men who used to be women…”. This separation of trans men and women from “real” (cis) men and women is a common misstep when non-pan people try to understand pansexuality. It should be noted that the writers of Schitt’s Creek are not pan, so this definition is being peddled by people outside our community. However, some pan people, particularly those who have just discovered they are pan, use it as well. On the pansexual subreddit, I have seen multiple people asking if they are pan because they are attracted to transgender people. This can lead to misconceptions regarding the inclusion of trans people in other sexualities. Anyone who is attracted to binary genders can be attracted to a trans person who identifies as a binary gender, because they ARE that gender. Lesbians can (or at least should) be attracted to trans women. Bi people should be attracted to trans men and women.
However, I am going to do something controversial. I am going to defend the explicit inclusion of trans people in explanations of pansexuality.
It’s no secret that transphobia is present in LGB communities. Lesbian TERFs angrily state they would never date a trans woman, and reduce trans women to their genitals when explaining why. This occurs in gay and even bi communities as well. It’s important that trans and genderqueer people feel safe and accepted by this side of the queer community, and yet they often aren’t. This is why I think it’s important that we make it explicitly clear that we will not tolerate this kind of transphobia in our community. When we explain who we are to people, it is important that we eliminate any possibility of transphobia in our explanations, because that is not and never should be acceptable.
I think the problem with explanations explicitly including trans people in our orientation isn’t the sentiment being expressed, but the way they are worded and structured. A typical explanation goes something like this:
“I am pansexual. That means I’m attracted to everyone. Men, women, enbies, trans people…”
I’m sure you see the problem here. Trans men and women are presented on a list of genders, as though they are another gender separate from cis men and women. I would like to propose a simple solution to this. When explaining who you are attracted to, perhaps word it like this instead:
“I am pansexual. That means I’m attracted to everyone. Men and women, whether cis or trans, enbies…”
You see the difference there? Instead of separating trans men and women from cis men and women, we are including them as one item on the list before specifying we mean ALL men and women, not just cis ones. I think this type of explanation is actually useful for combating transphobia in pan spaces, not harmful. We simply need to be careful HOW we educate people, to ensure our words are not misunderstood.
~Editor Luxe
Note: I am not trans. If you are trans and feel that my proposal is transphobic for a reason I have not thought of, please let me know in the notes or send me an ask and I will post a follow-up.
The pluralian flag is a beautiful symbol. Based on sapphic, achillean, and similar flags, it represents anyone who loves more than one gender. It applies to multisexual people everywhere. It is a uniting symbol that can be used by all of us, and it is something pan, bi, omni, and ply people often claim as a symbol of their connection and common struggles. It is a way for us to express that, while we are unique, we all share one thing in common: the plurality of our attraction.
However, you might notice something unusual about this flag: the flower in the middle. Most pride flags do not include images and symbols, instead being simply stripes. However, these flags contain flowers, usually symbolic ones. It is the mark of an umbrella flag (a flag designed to encompass all people who experience a specific type of attraction, for example, women who love women). The sapphic flag contains a violet. The achillean flag contains a carnation. Both of these are historic symbols used to identify wlw and mlm.
But the pluralian’s symbol, a lily is special. Unlike most other symbols, which were simply representations of a community, lilies ARE pluralian. They are a part of our community.
All lilies contain the reproductive organs to reproduce with any other lily. Lilies are not restricted by the confines of sex or gender. They love freely.
I think the potential of the lily as an enduring pluralian symbol cannot be understated. These plants are beautiful representations of the pluralian goal: to be able to love anyone freely, without stigma. To be able to see a human we love, and not have to worry about what their gender might be. To have the potential for attraction to anyone.
I am moving soon, and I think I will get a potted lily for my room. They are my kin.
I swear my attraction Both romantic and sexual Just loves to roll a dice And whatever it lands on Is what my main attraction is for the day!
Only becoming exclusive once feelings grow, Leaving me wondering if I have ever been attracted to different others before… Was I just bored?
But then, those feelings subside And I realize that I am not imagining things Until, feelings grow once again I exist as a confused, shaken bottle of frustration
Well, telling the secret would ruin the sunrise Don’t want to ruin the fun! What if we lose our magic? What if we lose our innocence?
Telling would mean that we would have to deal with the world That would love to burn us at the stake! Saying we’re martyrs for an agenda we chose But I didn’t chose to love you…
I love the way they exist. They have chaos in their mind but they’re vibrant in their soul.
They are as powerful as a forest fire! They think that they destroy everything in their path But really, they are creating a new path Creating a new path… They are the strongest person I know.
For awhile I’ve identified as being pansexual, but honestly it’s never fit completely for me (though it did fit more than when I identified as bisexual briefly when I first realized that I wasn’t straight), but I’ve been learning more about omnisexual and I think that finally fits a lot better for me
One problem though, I need puns guys, I can’t really go with “I got one foot in the pantry and one foot out” anymore. So if you have any puns, I would be very appreciated
Also, the Omnicorns is my new omni-orientated discord server and I would love if any Omnis out there or allies of it or even any other mspecs would like to join! :)) They all have cool role names dw
The mspec is the spectrum of people who are attracted to 2 or more genders. This includes bisexual, pansexual, omnisexual, and polysexual.
All of these are available in my shop! We also have acrylic pins of the bisexual cosmog and pansexual skitty, but I forgot to include those in the picture
[Image description: a photo of three stickers, four bottle charms, and 6 needle felted wool hearts. The stickers from left to right are drawings of the pokemon skitty, cosmog, and poipole with the pansexual, bisexual, and omnisexual flag behind them respectively. The bottle charms are in a circle. Starting from the top and going clockwise, there is bisexual, pansexual, polysexual, and omnisexual. There are two bright blue hearts, one dark blue heart, one purple heart, one yellow heart, and one pink heart.]
ALT
