HOME | DD
Keitilen — We're Colorfully Blind
by-nc-nd
Published: 2010-10-26 19:58:57 +0000 UTC; Views: 4139; Favourites: 77; Downloads: 11
Redirect to original
Description
This piece is dedicated to Pansexuals and in no way means they are better than everyone else. Nor does it say that other sexualities do not partake in "true love".Related content
Comments: 372
They are not all monogamous. Most are hopping on the "polyamorous" bandwagon. It also is not apart of the definition of pansexuality.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Wait what the fuck.
Did you just stereotype bisexuals as being polyamorous?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No. Again, I was meaning the difference. Yes, it is mostly just a stereotype. But some Bisexuals do it and that is why they call themselves "bi".
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
What? No it is not. You are disgusting.
Bisexual refers to liking the two sexes. That's all. Not being polyamorous.
Anyone can be polyamorous, even pansexuals.
Polyamory and monogamy have nothing to do with sexual orientation.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Reproductive organs in the animal kingdom: Testes/Ovaries.
Go talk to a pigeon about their vagina/penis. Oh wait, they both have cloacas, not vaginas or penises.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Obviously, this is about homosapiens and not any other species.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Then get your reproductive organs right. Because you only said the external genitalia.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'm not going to go into thorough detail when I have work in 10 minutes - sorry.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
LOL, you're copping out. You realize you can answer WHENEVER you want to? 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No one is coping out, I try clearing my messages as soon as I get on so I don't have any later. So, want to get back to the original argument rather than trying to be a smarta** against everything I say?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I think you mean copping out. Not coping. And you were copping out. You left a ridiculous reply that you were too "busy" and had to leave for work. When there is no "time limit" on replies.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'll think that you stopped in the middle of an argument.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I think that is worthless talking to a brick wall.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
More like getting tired from arguing with a wall who will never move and obviously only listens to their own self rather than considering the opinions of anyone else. 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Getting tired of being wrong. 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No, getting tired of arguing. It wears itself out after a while. I know you think you are correct, but it doesn't mean you are just because you say so.
And no, I am not admitting to being wrong. Nor did I ever address I was.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Getting tired of being wrong.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You have to continue to repeat yourself? Pretty sad.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Getting tired of being wrong.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You realize that men and women have more reproductive organs than simply the penis and the vagina, right? Those are the external genitalia; not the entire reproductive system.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes, I do. Being in Nursing means I had to study anatomy and such. I'm not going to continue going thoroughly through tiny details.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Then label them as the genitalia rather than the reproductive organs.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Uh duh I got that. I'm homosexual.
No. Their sexuality does not say they are attracted to a specific gender. Only a specific SEX.
PanSEXuality. BiSEXuality. 
Pansexuals are not monogamous. Also way to go, you just told the world bisexuals are not monogamous, you're fucking disgusting. Sex is NOT THE SAME as gender. No one is "Sex blind" unless they are bisexual.
Pansexuals being SOO monogamous: [link]
EVERYONE loves homosapien/homosapien. Though actually some pansexuals believe pansexual means they can fuck animals as well.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Huh.. reading this argument o' you guys.. (Don't really get the point of it Lol) But I'm bisexual, and I gotta say I don't think it means your gender(or 'sex' whichever word)blind, like pans say they are. I see pretty big differences between guys and girls, usually. Not exactly happy about it, but they do pretty obviously exist. And sometimes I'd rather be with a male-type personality, and sometimes a female-type.
Dunno if this'll 'help' at all with guys' lil war on definitions.. xD
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Sex is not the same as the word gender. Sexualities are based on biological sexes. Not genders. Technically speaking humans only have two genders BUT genders can also be considered different if it goes against society norm (which is why I am against using them, it promotes heteronormativity). An example is a girl who dresses androgynously, for some reason thinks they are not the same as any other woman. Or a woman who dresses masculinely thinks she is not a female "gender". This makes no sense. Anyone attracted to women will agree they are all women. Sure not everyone likes really girly girls, or really masculine girls, that's a taste thing. But anyone of any sexuality can love anyone of any gender. HOWEVER back to science, some species like the white-throated swallow actually DO have more than one scientific gender! They have two "female" genders and two "male" genders. But they still only have two biological sexes. Still it's two. "bi". And as for intersex people, well, they're made up of male and female. So being attracted to "male and female" still fits for them. Besides most intersex people are transgendered and should be thought of as the sex they wish to be.
Everyone can be gender blind. I'm a genderblind lesbian! I'm sexually/romantically attracted only to women, but I don't see gender in society as making anyone different. However pans say they are attracted to "all genders". Well sexuality isn't based on gender. Anyone of any sexuality can love anyone of any gender. It's not based on gender at all.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
..Wow that was long and slightly confusing. <3
I think I do get what you're saying, tho. (and I shouldn't exactly of said male-type, female-type, maybee, I think 'seme' and 'uke' say it best; but I've been living in a world lately that's mostly made up of older people that aren't around their twenties, and that's more how they talk...) Okay, so you're saying the word 'gender' is mentality based. I've heard of that before. (does the person who made this piece understand you're using the word that way?) I think in the piece, they're referring to the more traditional meaning of that word. (you know, penises and vaginas, sense 'sex' and 'gender' seem to have very arguable meanings in this conversation thing. xD) And actually, the piece's wording doesn't use that word at all. It's actually pretty vague.
I met a girl once in high school that first told me she was pan, and what that was.. To me, the difference between it and bisexual is bis sometimes feel like being with a girl, sometimes a guy, and pans don't care what's in the pants at alll. xD
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
seme (top), uke (bottom), and riba you mean! (riba is japanese name for the western term of 'reversible'. as in one who can top or bottom or likes to top and bottom.)
Well there is a "scientific" form of gender. SCIENTIFICALLY speaking humans only have TWO genders...male and female. But gender can also mean in relation to your role in society. But I am against gender roles entirely. However what I mean is some species (not humans, though) do have more than one gender! The white-throated swallow for instance has two female gender and two male genders, but only two sexes. This help a little? But I am not against people making up their own "gender", I just hope they knwo sexuality isn't based on this. (I don't think the person who made the piece grasps that, I've explained it numerous times, though...)
Definition-wise pansexual means you're bisexual but will also have sex with different species and inanimate objects...so unless they really are zoophiles, they should just call themselves bisexual.
And if you go to bisexual-faq websites they state bisexuality as not caring for sex/gender as well, haha.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
"Sex" and "gender" are the definition for the same thing.
Pansexuality does refer to being monogamous. And if they are not, they would not be considered "Pansexual".
I NEVER said "bisexuals are not monogamous". You are stretching words for the 100th time in this conversation.
👍: 0 ⏩: 3
Not to mention even if sex and gender are the same there's only two sexes.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The "sex vs gender" thing was already replied to.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
FYI: Only replies to me are seen in my inbox. I'm not God.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, now you know. And sometimes it's good to overlook the entirety of discussion rather than just the ones legitimately addressed.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No, it's not. Ever seen how debate works?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Definitely - I was on a team for 4 years.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Then you should go back to it. ^^
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Why, when I can just post a work of mine onto this website and argue - especially to people who only listen to themselves.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You said you weren't going to argue XDDD;
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I said I don't want to argue with you anymore - referring to THIS discussion. But, obviously, you continue to drag it on.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
If they're the same thing then you're a BISEXUAL. "Regardless of gender" or "regardless of sex" you're still a bisexual.
No, most pansexuals are polyamorous, actually. And bisexual is NOT about being polyamorous. You can be polyamorous with any sexuality, and you can be monogamous with any sexualiy. I love how you're an exbi biphobe.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Again, NEVER SAID BISEXUAL INCLUDES BEING POLYAMOROUS.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You implied it hun. You said pansexuality is different from bisexuality because supposedly it's "monogamous" even though that's not in the definition at all.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No, never purposely implied it. You are "nit picking" on every single reply of mine.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You did purposely imply it. Or you wouldn't say it. ^_^ Regardless you don't even know the definition of pansexuality, let alone bisexuality.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I believe in the true definitions.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That's a good thing, you should practice it more.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
<= Prev | | Next =>