#and i think thats what microlabels are kind of for

[raedas]

hey i was just wondering how you figured out you were aro?? no pressure if you’re uncomfortable sharing of course ! but i’m kind of questioning and i thought maybe hearing other people’s experiences might help. and also i was in a relationship for almost a year so that’s probably somewhat significant and additionally complicating ahaha <333

hey anon!! first and foremost good luck with figuring everything out <33 i know at least for me, questioning can be a long and hard and typically ongoing process, but we'll make it through :] i'm gonna stick the rest of my answer beneath the read more bc im getting the sense im gonna go on for a bit FGDHLKSFAJ

one of the biggest things for me that i think is necessary to preface everything is that i've never really had an "oh" moment like some people talk about. there's never been a moment where i saw a label or a flag and was 100% sure i fit into that box, its more like... years worth of questioning and then the internal meter in my head slowly ticking over. like, when i was figuring out i was queer, i maybe started questioning in like... fifth grade you could say? but it started as more of a "oh im definitely not but like What if" and then gradually began to tick more and more towards "oh i think i might not be cishet" to eventually when i hit the... idk, 80% or 90% certainty mark it was more of a "fuck it, im queer" feeling. there's always going to be that bit of doubt for me, i think, and coming to terms with being aro was very similar for me in that regards

another thing is i was ALSO in a relationship for almost a year, and that's during the time when i was coming to terms with being aro/arospec, which im sure you can imagine was an Experience. i do think being in a relationship was the best thing for me trying to figure out i was aro though, bc i definitely got that sense of Wrongness of trying to think of myself as existing in a romantic relationship. like, when i thought of myself as having a romantic partner, it always felt a bit like i was playing at a part and acting like i had romantic feelings more than i actually did. of course that came with.. a lot of me trying to ignore my own feelings and feeling guilty about it up until i broke up with my now ex (this is like the funniest inside joke ever to us now dw) so that's where i was coming from w/ my experiences

i also began to realize that like, whenever i try to imagine myself in a romantic relationship, its always in some ambiguous future like 10 or so years down the line, which completely distances myself from the idea. i have no idea what a romantic relationship with someone would look like for me, it was just this idea of "yeah, someday in an ambiguous future ill have a romantic relationship with someone and we'll cook together and hug each other and have fun" until i realized that i don't actually want a romantic relationship, and also that... none of those things that i actually envisioned are exclusive to a romantic relationship. in my life ive had a grand total of 2 crushes, both of which were/are queerplatonic but also like... if i imagine having an Actual relationship its just stressful to me and not even really appealing, despite the fact that i have a crush on them.

one of the most important things im coming to terms is that its okay if im wrong, its okay if however many years down the line i find out that im actually entirely allo and fall in love with someone. like i said i dont know if ill ever be 100% confident in my own labels especially with the whole issue of "how do you prove a negative". for now, though, calling myself aro is something that makes me happy and feels, most of the time, accurate. another really important thing i think is that aromanticism is entirely a spectrum. you could be aromantic or arospec in a billion different ways*, or you could be none of them, and thats okay too <333 good luck with everything anon i hope hearing about my experiences helped a bit :]

[fite-club]

The piss poor definitions of everything in the ace community lead to basically 90% of the world being able to identify as asexual. Asexuality is defined by deviance from the norm, but no one fucking knows what the norm is. If you have less sexual attraction than an 'allo' person, you're grey sexual. How much sexual attraction does an allo person have? Uhh no one knows. It's literally unquantifiable. There's no actual definition for 'allosexual' other than 'normal' or 'average' but then those words are never defined. So you just have to guess what the norm is based on the 3 people you're close enough with to talk about this philosophical stuff about attraction and hypersexualized media where everyone is fucking everyone because it makes for a good sitcom. It's genuinely impossible and that's why so many in the ace community are so confused about where they fall and so insecure about their identity because they're all just guessing.

And god, the label hopping. People find out they actually experience sexual attraction and the ace community does their best to keep them from going away, shoving microlabel after microlabel at them so they never think that maybe they're a dreaded allosexual after all.

one more thing. The ace community is so focused on separating itself from the rest of the world that they make everything more difficult for themselves. They do stuff to deliberately stand out, make awkward jokes about being too enlightened for sex (..while having regular sex half the time), make up weird relationship constructs and get upset that no one wants to be in them. They psych themselves out over feeling attraction and start acting extremely weird because tHatS wHaT tHe aLlOs dO. Plus the extremely unattractive ways they describe why they have sex and then they get upset that no one wants to date them because they say they see their partner as a flesh sex toy. Girl just be normal. Describe yourself as a low libido person and youll be fine i prommy.

that's what i meant by the ace community imploding by being too inclusive, they lost the plot as soon as the split attraction model entered the picture. the experiences of someone who is an "asexual" as in "aroace" as in "someone who wants platonic partnership only" are unique and are shared amongst other people of the same identity. when you open that up, though, suddenly there aren't those shared experiences, and those labels don't convey the same thing. there's no good reason why someone who wants sex would label themselves as asexual, just like there's no good reason why someone who wants sex with someone of the same gender would label themselves as straight. that kind of prescriptive "gatekeeping" is seen as evil by inclusionists but to exclusionists it's just basic reality. if a straight couple identifies as "demisexual", what makes their experiences different from a straight allosexual couple? the fact that neither of them were sexually attracted to each other at first really does not affect the material reality of their lives, to everyone else on earth they are a straight couple that has sex. but if you acknowledge that, you have to acknowledge that those people have privilege and are not lgbt, which ace inclusionists stubbornly refuse to do.

and yeah the worst part is all the teens who get stuck in an echo chamber of "aspec" people, their perception of how others experience attraction and relationships get so warped. like your classmates being awkward after you tell them "i have no interest in sex" isn't because they think you're messed up for being ace, it's because they didn't ask and most likely do not care. you may struggle with your own insecurities about being lonely but you can't just project them as if the norm is that being single is weird

[jegulily-stuff]

Just wondering! In your opinion do you hc James as bi or pan ? Cos it's sort of a mini debate, not that he needs a label. And if so are jegulily the holy trinity of bisexuals...?

#jegulily asks

i guess firstly how are you defining those as different? 'bisexual' is almost never used in real life to not mean attraction to all genders. (common opinion i think is that pansexuality is attraction regardless of gender whereas bisexuality is active attraction to all genders but thats subjective)

the individual's opinion is the main difference between these labels and often what's important with labels generally since theyre artificial boxes attempting to describe individual experiences. and that means my objective view isnt the same as what the characters own opinion might be

canon era james doesnt have access to the term pansexual as it comes from the 1990s (rip), only bisexual is an option. and while i do think he'd like the modern idea of attraction regardless of gender i think in his era that's what bisexual means to him (he's more likely than reg to have access to and be comfortable using newly coined muggle terms).

modern james might prefer pansexual. i think he might even see himself as both with bisexual being an umbrella term

objectively from an external perspective i might give him the microlabel that means attracted to femininity regardless of gender/sex (which is mine too) but i don't see him as the kind of guy who goes searching for a microlabel. he doesnt feel like he doesn't belong or doesnt know who he is so he's pretty relaxed about the whole thing

[femmesandhoney]

Ngl the Chappell Roan situation kind of confirms to me that people largely see bisexual women as the “cringe sexuality” to the point bisexual women either call themselves lesbian or some made up microlabel. Sad

most bi women do not call themselves a lesbian bc they think its "cringe" to be bi, being a lesbian has like. often negative associations and labels still...i would not say thats the generally correct way people perceive what constitues a "cool" label. most youth and young adults think being extremely fluid and open (bi, even if they themselves aren't) is more fashionable to be seen as than lesbian. if you think its seen as cringy, eh, i do not agree people see bisexuality as some cringe or fringe label to the point many bi women are calling themselves lesbian. theres always the normal chances a bi women is legit just confused as they navigate their feelings and if its bi/lez.

if you were to ask me to psychoanalyze a woman i barely know (yay!) i would guess she might just be both a religiously traumatized woman and a more reserved bisexual woman in a hypersexualized society, where bi women especially are often stereotyped as hypersexual, polyamorous, and willing to get down with whomever. she seems to not vibe with those associations, which might be leading her to feel confused about her orientation a lot, and also why she might be so intent on this "hypersexual lesbian" persona or whatever. it might feel healing to her to do, but it also is, well, still all a bit lesbophobic in many ways.

[kozzax]

I do have to say that I am now reading act 6 and I will say it is somehow the most confusing of the acts so far. I also dont really care for the romance drama but I like Callie and Roxy so I'm winning.

I'm pretty postitive towards Jake, my boyfriend really likes him so i feel more inclined to like him from that. *looks around* not super big on Dirkjake other than in a friends way because Wow that boy is aromantic af. Jake i mean, not Dirk. I like the onesided crush tho, thats fun. Unsure what other thing you may be reffering to about him

No that's my big jake opinion. That's the one I'm so incredibly opinionated on. That boy is AROMANTIC as FUCK. Personally I think all of the alpha kids are various aromantic microlabels because I think it's more interesting to read them that way but Jake specifically is just. All but explicitly stated to be aromantic. Fun fact: Callie is canonically aro! She's the only explicit aro character but in the epilogues she's referred to as a "possibly aromantic skeleton alien monster girlfriend" like... one time. Please ignore the uhhhhhh. Issues. With that depiction of aromanticism.

Fair warning: one thing you're going to run into a lot of in the homestuck fandom at large Is dirkjake. It's kind of hard to avoid because it is one of the biggest canon ships. I think it's like.... the fourth biggest relationship tag on ao3-- don't quote me on that, I don't have it pulled up right now. Those of us who Understand jake english either interact with it in the correct way (jake who is undergoing incredible internalized amatonormativity and doesn't know how to address that / dirk who likes the attention and doesn't have the social understanding to know this isn't what it's supposed to be like) or say they're friends. But there's a good portion of this fandom, as with any fandom, that doesn't understand his aromanticism.

How far into act 6 are you? There's a uhhhhh. Pretty big. Thing. That happens about halfway through. You'll know it when you see it but I don't want to spoil it for you if you haven't seen it yet.

[aroacemarie]

peeked in the 'asocial' tag and it seems theres like. 10 million different definitions of it being used in various communities? so i feel like having used the term just now i wanna clarify what *I* mean by it

im gonna pop this under a read more bc its a long one.

im NOT using it as an ace/aro microlabel (not judging those who do tho). i dont consider it a part of my sexuality/orientation/lgbtq identity. its more of just a personality thing?

im also not schizoid, to my knowledge. im sure i have traits of it? or maybe my understanding of it is wrong? i just know i went through a brief stretch where my being asocial meant i was schizoid, but upon more thoroughly researching the symptoms of schizoid personality disorder i determined it did not apply to me.

its also unrelated to social anxiety. i DO have social anxiety disorder, but my being asocial isnt a fear-related trait. basically while social interaction/the anticipation of social interaction can trigger an anxious response in me, i dont have a strong Drive to be social in the first place.

its also why i consider my asocial trait as being different from being an introvert. its kinda like introversion on steroids. introverts still seem to have a need to interact, whereas loneliness is genuinely a foreign concept to me.

i also dont consider it a symptom of my depression... mostly. yes, withdrawing from social interaction is a bigtime depression, its more of a withdrawal in that context than an general inclination. when im withdrawn bc of a major-depressive episode, it is characterized by hurt and an overwhelming sense of dread/hopelessness. when its just my day to day default state, however, it has a peaceful, content quality.

so to describe it by what it IS instead of what it ISNT:

-i describe my being asocial as an extreme lack of a drive to be social. i dont really feel the need to seek out interaction, and while i still absolutely DO interact with the people i like, i tend to be abnormally unlikely to reach out.

-being alone makes me feel content, not lonely. it feels like sitting by the window on a cold day, wrapped in a warm blanket and sipping a warm drink, peacefully watching the leaves float by delicately on a gentle breeze, the with soothing voice of the wind whispering to you a comforting hush.

-i love my friends deeply. even when i dont interact with a friend for an extended period of time, i still think of them with a deep fondness. i picture their smiles, the way they make me laugh, the way their eyes sparkle with excitement when they talk about their interests. i feel a deep warmth in my heart, and reflect on how much i cherish them, even though i dont feel inclined to reach out and chat with them at that moment. i can still miss them too, even if im not necessarily doing anytying to fix it! (for the record, hazel if youre reading this i was thinking about you as i typed this section, ahaha 💚)

-i get exhausted and overstimulated by conversation easily, even when im speaking to someone i love about one of my favorite topics. its pretty common of me to tap out of conversations or "leave you on read" for hours simply because i exhausted myself. that being said, i DO love to have deep, meaningful conversations!

-i dont find talkative friends to be "annoying" or a burden. quite the contrary; im flattered they like me enough to invest their time and energy into speaking with me! i just have low stamina.

-its kind of like when youre doing your favorite hobby or playing your favorite game but youve been at it too long and youre too wiped to continue. thats how i feel about talking to the people i like, but my stamina might only last a minute or two before im metaphorically "out of breath"

-i dont hate people. in fact? i LOVE people. i look upon all the humans out there, living unique lives and unique experiences, and i feel a sense of childlike wonder. i think of how fascinating their perspective of the world is; their core beliefs and how they developed, the things that bring them joy that would seem strange to me, the things they know that i simply do not. but i dont really want to necessarily have a conversation with them. i prefer being an observer, reading the thoughts they share in public forums (like tumblr and twitter). humans are so fascinating. i just wanna watch you for hours like youre in a little terrarium!

-im told im great with people, and honestly i make friends very easily! not to say im never awkward or am immune to social fuckups! but im empathetic and am told have a high emotional intelligence and tend to make people feel at ease. im really tactful and great at defusing conflict (my favorite quote was in college when a friend told me "you could literally tell somebody to go fuck themselves without offending them." love it, ahaha). the thing is... i dont WANT to make friends. ive got everyone i need already, yknow? my Friendship Inventory is full.

im also gonna acknowledge that my asocial nature is very likely linked to trauma. i do have CPSTD from abuse that spanned the entirety of my childhood, from my earliest memories all the way into my mid-late teens. alone felt Safe, and it still does. but its not a Disorder; it does not cause me distress or impede my ability to "function." god knows ive got plenty of disorders/symptoms that DO. but being asocial is not one of them.

anyway, i hope this helps people understand me a bit better. im always worried that im a Bad Friend (being in a 6 year abusive friendship w someone who constantly called me that didnt help) for not reaching out to people/checking on my friends more. its just... a Thing. ive accepted that its not something i can change about myself, and i acknowledge that means im just not compatible with certain people, to no fault of their own. and thats fine! im not gonna be insulted or like you any less just because we arent the kind of people who could have a closer relationship in a healthy way. some folks just dont vibe w each other!

to any of my friends (and acquaintances! we dont need to be close!) reading this, i love you! i mean that, and i hope reading this helps you understand that i truly do, even if im bad at showing it.

stay frosty ✌

[william-s-churros]

the maia arson crimew identity discourse has so heavily featured one of the most classic discourse tactics ill call "deflection sandwich" which is where you sandwich a semirelated inflammatory opinion in between two slices of a Real and Important Issue and then get mad when people respond to your inflammatory opinion instead of the Real and Important Issue, and deflect criticism by constantly pointing out that Actually your post was about the important issue and by engaging with the semirelated inflammatory opinion, people are showing themselves to be shallow assholes who don't care about the Real Thing that YOU care about and therefore their criticisms dont and shouldnt matter

i like dont even know if people do this on purpose or not, but regardless, the result is the same. tbh if you dont want people to respond to the inflammatory opinion you chose to include, the easiest way to get around that is to just not even include it, because by including an inflammatory opinion, you're inviting people to respond to it. and if you care about the Real Issues, then you shouldnt need to include your semirelated inflammatory opinion in the first place, should you? its like you derailed the conversation yourself to begin with and are now acting like its someone elses fault. i mean idk. but anyway

and an addendum to the above: it does kind of suck when people (especially cis people???? but also. other people who are not trans women/transfemmes. lol) act like the harassment of trans women/transfemmes online for the slightest of "transgressions" is, like, not A Real Issue? its like regardless of what good that trans women/transfemmes do, or any of their amazing accomplishments, its like people are just chomping at the bit for an excuse to justify virulently hating them so much that they feel possessed by the urge to tell them that they should die, they should kill themselves, or they should be punished in some way for being "incorrect". its like even if you ~hate microlabels~ or ~are a reactionary~ i think you can find it in your heart to give her a fucking break and like lay off that shit for five fucking minutes or better yet, reassess your priorities? i mean i think a lot of people would argue their opinions of maia crimew have nothing to do with it being a transfemme but like even if thats not actively what youre thinking i would maybe at least consider the possibility that you have some unexamined hostility to trans women/transfemmes burbling in your subconscious, ESPECIALLY if you dont think that its A Real Issue and doesnt need to be discussed, i guess lol idk!!!!!

[the-prince-rambles]

wanted to. perhaps ramble a little (wowee not like that's what this is for!) but yeah. This is. sorta serious? But not 100%. I'm simply going to dump out my brain and hope that something can be gained from this.

I've mentioned on my other blog how stupidly complex my gender identity is (I'm still working out exactly what labels and pronouns would apply even now.) but, I think I've found one. And. what I'm worried about is the fact that its sort of a microlabel, but it hits that one part in my little lizard brain that goes "ough. thats some good label" and. I kind of do identify with it.

And that's Genderfaun.

I won't exactly go into the description of the nuances of it (for one, google is free, and two. I've already sort of explained my gender at the moment on my pride post from my main blog) And. I know its not the biggest of deals. but. finding a label and being able to point at a pretty colour flag and go: "That one. That's me." is really nice..

Pronouns are another whole sack of worms. And thats a post for another time. Although. If I am gonna post more about my gender shit here. maybe I'll do a little series where I write about my experience with that-- My little gender journal.

Anyways. Ramble over. Thought maybe some people out there could relate.

[velavesper]

anyway happy pride peace and love on planet earth

for years i spent looking for a microlabel for myself to use and this year i have realized. no label fits me! i am simply some person and that is ok. but i love seeing my friends and strangers being so happy with themselves and who they are and i think thats what pride should be about. we are different why are we alienating each other!!

i think everyone this pride should endulge in kindness. and also not stop being so kind after pride ends. pride month is super important but we gotta raise eachother up and up all the time ! this includes the being straight is illegal image

[sangfielle]

the way 11 year old me already had a microlabel identity for my gender thats literally still how i feel about gender today....

[wannimoon]

saw a post that bothered me earlier and i cant stop thinking about it so dont mind me while i rant really quick. scroll if u want idc.

does it really fucking matter if bi lesbians exist or not? does it really fucking matter if some trans men identify as lesbians? does it really matter if pansexuality and bisexuality are so similar? does it really matter at all that some people use microlabels, or labels that you dont understand, to define themselves?

its not about everyone being valid no matter what. its about the fact that our oppressors do not fucking care about what labels we use. homophobes are not going to check what our pronouns are and if our labels are “the right ones” we use before they fucking hate crime us.

i genuinely do not care if bi lesbians are “valid” or not. i genuinely do not care if its “possible” for trans men to be lesbians. all i care about is that they’re queer, and so they belong in this community with me and, and so i will respect whatever identity they tell me they are and i will help protect them from those that are trying to hurt us.

the post i saw said something along the lines of “capitalist society encourages individuality to the point of us wanting to distance ourselves from others as much as we can” okay, if that’s how you see it, sure. if you want to avoid microlabels for that reason, that is a completely fair and reasonable stance to take! sincerely! but thats not a decision you get to make for anyone else. and how do you know the people using those labels arent doing so SPECIFICALLY because theyve felt excluded and shunned by people like you, forcing them to try and find community somewhere else, with people who understand them?

if you’re even a little bit concerned with the people around you using the “correct” labels you are actively fighting against queer liberation. the whole POINT of liberation is that we dont try to force ourselves to confine to what “makes sense” to other people. you could argue that microlabels are just a way to make smaller and smaller boxes to force yourself in, and in some cases i’d be inclined to agree with you. but again, thats not a decision you get to make for other people and YOU DO NOT HAVE ANY RIGHT WHATSOEVER to define for someone else how THEY experience gender and sexuality and how THEY choose to express it.

fuck off with your gatekeeping bullshit. there will NEVER be ANY KIND of queer exclusion that could ever be “woke” or morally correct. infighting in the queer community will always be a win for the oppressor. so shut the fuck up, mind your business, and stop trying to define other people’s identities.

[vampireqrow-moved]

um its my birthday so wait until 12:01am pst to block me if u hate this post 🥰🥰

long story short the pansexual label is redudant and actively harmful (its far from the worst problem bisexuals face but it is one issue) and i dont hate anyone who identifies as pan because A) those ppl are bi like me and B) i used to identify as pan myself.

if thats enough for you to block me and make a callout post for me then i cant stop you but pretty please either read this whole thing or just wait a few minutes for my bday to end 🥰🥰

anyways im kicking off this point with some personal experiences bc i love to talk to myself. i got introduced to the pan label at maybe 10ish years old, and started identifying with it pretty much right away. i heard about it before bisexual and it was pitched as attraction to all genders and of course trans people. i was of course a trans ally! i had trans friends! i was trans also but hadnt figured it out yet! the way i had heard of it, there was no bisexual, there was no need for bisexual, and identifying differently was excluding trans people, which I was certainly against. being bisexual was trans exclusionary and why would i exclude trans people? the 'hearts not parts' slogan was thriving around this time and i genuinely said it and meant it.

as i started to become more online, mostly through roleplaying websites and tumblr here, i started hearing of bisexuality. it was supposedly an older term, so older people still used it, but it was common knowledge that pansexual was the better, inclusive label and younger people should adopt the new inclusive language instead of the old and transphobic words like bisexual. /s

and then bi and pan solidarity was all the rage! pansexual wasnt erasing bisexuality, why did anyone ever think that? bi and pan were two separate and complete identities that were valid and had to be respected or youre a mean exclusionist. and an asexual person, hearing people labelled exclusionist always meant they were excluding people from the lgbta community who rightfully belonged, denying peoples lived experiences, and generally telling people theyre wrong about their sexuality because theyre too young. and all of those things were bad and had hurt me, so it would be ridiculous to change labels and support "pan exclusionists" because they were just as bad as ace and aro exclusionists, and they were all the same people. or so it seemed to me at that time.

then, 'hearts not parts' began getting called out for blatant transphobic by insinuating that pansexual was the only identity that loved people for their "hearts" and personalities instead of those gross gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and even straights who only saw people for their "parts". (STRAIGHT PEOPLE ARE NOT OPPRESSED. I AM MERELY POINTING OUT THAT PANSEXUALITY WAS SHOWN AS ABOVE ALL OTHERS.) many pan people, including myself, began to denounce the slogan and insist pansexuality wasnt transphobic, there had just been a coincidence that a transphobic slogan was everywhere and a huge part of people's explantions of and associations with pansexuality. hint: it wasnt a coincidence.

from my perspective, this is when i began to see people discussing dropping the word pansexual. that seemed to be a huge step from getting rid off a transphobic slogan, and these people were just meanies who hated microlabels. and i like microlabels! as a genderfluid person, and someone who has friends who use specific aro and acespec labels, ive seen how people can use them to name specific experiences while still acknowleging their presence underneath umbrella terms like aromantic, asexual, nonbinary, lgbta, and for some people, queer.

pansexuals dont do that. they dont label pansexuality as a specific set of experiences under the bisexual umbrella, they see themselves as a separate identity, and even if they started to, the history of biphobia and transphobic undeniably linked to the existence of pansexuality in enough to stop being worth using. but i digress. pansexualitys shiny new definition that many people cling to is that pansexual is attraction to all genders. bisexual is two or more genders.

which. frankly? doesnt make any sense. my guess is that its supposed to be inclusive of nonbinary genders and those a part of cultures who historically have not had a binary gender system in the first place. i cannot speak for the latter group, but as a nonbinary person, its not inclusive. anyone can be attracted to nonbinary people. literally anyone. theres no way to know if everyone you meet is nonbinary or not. whether or not a nonbinary person reciprocates those feelings and is interested in pursuing a relationship is completely up to the individual, regardless of the sexualities of the people involved.

bottom line is that you cant number the amounts of genders someone can be attracted to, thus rendering those definitions pointless. people can be attracted to all kinds of people regardless of gender, even if they are gay, a lesbian, or straight. all people can date thousands of nonbinary genders if all people involved are interested and comfortable with it. numbering the genders you can be attracted to diminishes the post of nonbinary, as it is not a third gender, it simply any experience not fitting within the western concept of the gender binary (if the person so chooses to identify as such. if you cant tell already, the nonbinary experience is varied between every single nonbinary person.) important to note also that no widely accepted bisexual text defines bisexual as attracted to exclusively two genders or even the "two or more genders". i know this is used a lot but please read the bisexual manifesto. its free online i promise.

some people also claim pansexuals experience "genderblind" attraction while bisexuals feel differently attracted to different genders. this is very nitpicky for whats supposed to be two unconnected idenities, but thats only part of the problem. this definition is also not in any widely accepted bisexual texts, and bisexuality has never excluded those who experience genderblind attraction. i am in fact a bi person who experiences genderblind attraction. this does not mean i am not bisexual. it simply means i experience bisexuality differently than other bisexuals, and thats wonderful! no broad communities like bisexuality are expected to all share the same experience. we are all so different and its amazing were able to come together under the bisexual flag.

last definition, or justification i should say, is that yes these definitions are redundant and theyre the same sexuality, but people prefer different labels and thats okay. i agree in principle. people can define themselves as many things like homosexuals or gays or lesbians or queers or even other reclaimed slurs, while still not labelling themselves under the most "common" or "accurate" labels.

but pansexuality isnt the same as bisexuality, which may sound silly but hear me out. it has been continually used as a way to further divide bisexuals, who are already subject to large amounts of lgbta discrimination. "pansexuality was started by trans people who were upset with transphobia within the bisexual community! it cant be transphobic OR biphobic!" except of course that it can and it is. to say that trans people cant be transphobic is absurd. transmedicalism is right there, but thats not what im getting at. all minorities can have internal and sometimes external biases against people who are the same minority as them.

pansexuality was started as a way to be trans inclusive at the expense of labelling bisexuality as transphobic when its not. transphobia is everywhere, and bisexuals are not exempt. instead of working on the transphobia within the community, the creators of pansexuality decided to remove themselves from it to create a better and less tainted word and community, and the fact that pansexuality is intended to replace bisexuality or leave it for the transphobes goes to show a few things. pansexuality and bisexuality are inherently linked because the pan label is in response to the bi label. due to its origins, it is inherently competing with bisexuality and it cant be "reclaimed" from its biphobic roots. pansexuality is not a whole, separate, and valid label. its a biphobic response to issues within the bisexual community.

to top off this post, heres something a full grown adult once said to me. in person. she was my roommate. "i feel like im pan because im attracted to trans people. trans women, trans men, i could definitely date them. but not nonbinary people because thats gross and weird." she saw pan as trans inclusive and defined herself that way as opposed to bi which is shitty!

also a little extra tidbit about my experiences identifying as pan. i saw myself as better than every bi person. all of them. even my trans and bi friends. whenever they brought up being bisexual i would think to myself "why dont you identify as pansexual? its better and shows people you support trans people." because i was made to believe bisexuality didnt and was therefore inferior. thats the mindset that emerged from my time in the pansexual community. i am so sorry to all of my bisexual friends even if they never noticed. i love you all and hope you have a great day. this also goes to any bisexuals or people who identify as bi in anyway, such as biromantic or simply bi. love you all.

ummm yeah heres some extra reading i found helpful and relevant. here and here. also noooo dont disagree with me and unfollow me im so sexy 🥴🥴🥴

[thegeminisage]

Do u have any advice for a questioning ace or resource references that may have helped u? I consider myself a bi ace and I DO find ppl attractive and beautiful and I feel all gooey/butterflies w attractive ppl but I also don't want to have sex with them?? Like maybe down the line if I really RLLY fall in love with someone and they want that I can try/ease into it but I don't have any intention or want to do that right now. Does that sound ace at all?

the website i went to when i was figuring stuff out was the message boards on aven, but i haven’t been there in over a literal decade, so i can’t vouch for it anymore - i feel like i read that they had a little bit of a racism problem in recent years. reddit is for the most part deeply DEEPLY cursed but i comment over at r/asexuality sometimes (not...under this name i have a secret name lol) and they seem like generally a good bunch. just, uh, don’t wander out of there. i really wish i had a tumblr blog to give you but i find most of them these days are filled with people complaining about aphobia which is SOOO fucking valid but it gets disheartening to see on your dash like ALL the time yk? but if anyone has any they can link ‘em in the notes. imo the best resource is to talk to or read about what other ace people are saying about their feelings and experiences, especially older aces or people who are “used to” being ace, if that makes any sense. not to sound too self-important but being almost two decades out from my first “oh i might be that” moment i like to think i qualify lol. i say this a lot but ftr my door is always open for these kinds of questions!! 

anyway, first of all, the short answer, yes, that does sound totally ace. you can get the butterflies and find people beautiful without finding them HOT/sexually attractive. you can be attracted to someone w/o it being sexual. so if all or most or even much of the time you don’t feel sexual attraction, you’re under the ace umbrella.

asexuality is on a huge spectrum and there’s not really any such thing as like the ace police who are gonna come throw u in jail if you’re not “really” ace. but labels are supposed to describe our experiences, not the other way around - you don’t need to worry too much about if you’re “ace enough,” if that makes any sense. you're allowed to just try it out and think of yourself that way for awhile and see if it feels good and makes you feel more right with the world. a lot of ace people go thru TONS of different labels - i was bisexual, demisexual, a lesbian, a bunch of stuff. so don’t feel like you have to pick one and stick to it.

one of the things about asexuality is that it’s really hard to confirm the ABSENCE of something (which is why a lot of ace people wind up IDing as bi at first - in both cases it’s a situation of feeling the same about every gender, it’s just the switch being flipped “on” or “off” - also please read that post i think it would rly help u). it’s also easy to mix up sexual attraction and libido, and for a lot of people, especially afab people/people with periods, both can fluctuate with both the time of month and your age. so you don’t have to have a clear-cut “ugh NO thanks” reaction or total disinterest in sex/finding other people sexy to “count” as ace. neutrality or ambivalence totally “counts” too (the ace community even coined special terms for people who are sex neutral vs repulsed vs favorable), even having sexual attraction one every other month when the weather is right or having a list of exception “counts” because there are SO many ways to be asexual, it really is such a massive spectrum!!! and aces are the last people who are gonna be gatekeepy about it lol

i don’t personally care for microlabels, i don’t even use the split attraction model because i find the sheer amount of jargon overwhelming/exhausting and difficult to explain to the general population, but reading through the list of them (this list also explains some split attraction model terms) gives you an idea of sheer number of different ways people experience asexuality and attraction to others. it’s part of why i love being asexual, because even if we tend to overthink things, we’re a group of people who are willing to tackle the norms of sex/romance/etc and talk about the different ways those feelings have us interacting with the world. my point is at some point almost every ace person has gone “does that even COUNT as ace?” so like if you’re asking the question imo that’s one of the most asexual things you can do lol <3

anyway, that’s it!! like i said, you don’t have to memorize that whole vocabulary list up there, i personally find the sheer amount of jargon to be too much, BUT i think it’s good to know that there are a lot of ways to “fit” into that ace box. so if it’s a useful label for you and it helps you communicate how you feel to other people more easily, Thats The One, yk? i hope you got at least a little something helpful out of the rambling. ur always welcome to write back if u ever want to talk <3

[gibbearish]

thinking about. how i saw a tiktok of a girl complaining some post included the pan flag but forgot the lesbian flag and "lesbians are literally the first fucking letter and yet they decided to leave us out and include some fucking fake identity thats just a microlabel anyways so its not like it matters" and then almost immediately after saw two seperate videos by cis women, one saying she had just had a man threaten to break her jaw because he thought she was trans, and the other covered in bruises because someone thought she was trans and beat the shit out of her, and im just kind of like. who the fuck does that first girl think she is to complain about this petty ass shit in the face of real actual problems. and she even had the nerve to call pansexuality a "chronically online" thing? no baby you know whats ~chronically online~ is throwing a bitchfit that someone forgot your flag while including some nasty mogai pc inclusivity bullshit uwu. do you know what the grown up thing to do is when your flag gets left out? you say "hey could you include this flag too" and either they say yes and everyones happy or they say no and you block them because theyre a gatekeeping shitbag just like you. i literally fucking hate this so much

[enbypanposi]

hey genuine question but whats the difference between bi and pan? so sorry if this sounds rude but im just curious

Alright so im gonna use this ask to soapbox a little. Your question is not bad and is in fact a common one so no shame but I just have some Thoughts on this.

Hot take, but: There is no functional difference that matters among any mspec identity. Hear me out:

I see loads of posts trying to find a difference, and they ultimately become very granular and honestly thats not how orientation usually works. Its an instinct and and impulse and we dont control it. There a whole lot of “bi means 2 or more and pan means all with no preference and omni means all with preference” and etc for every mspec identity but thats not accurate. Pan people have preferences, omni people might not, and there are definite flaws with the ‘two or more’ definition of bi that bi blogs have pointed out better than I ever could. When we get more and more specific with identity that way we exclude people who dont fit the definition because we make it retroactively narrower. “Pan means x and y but not z” leads to “therefore all mspec people who are x and y must be pan no matter what label they use” and “therefore pan people who are z must use a different label.” Thats not right. Labels arent just words whose definitions we fit, their words we CHOOSE to describe us. Definitions dont pick peoples labels, people pick peoples labels. So I think when we ask this ‘whats the difference’ question we mean well but ultimately reinforce gatekeeping identity. ‘Whats the difference’ is kind of meaningless because sexuality is individual and everyone has different experiences with it and how they define themself, which may not be exactly 10000% in line with their chosen label. A bi and pan person may both describe their sexuality the same way, but that doesnt mean that they ARE the same, and plenty other bi and pan people will describe it in different ways. Sexuality isnt rigidly defined and in fact cant be. It may make it easier to think about when we invent these rigid definitions but ultimately thats not a good thing and will just make people more confused about themselves. Not everyone is able to parse out and differentiate x and y and z in their sexuality. Plenty of people dont want to. They shouldnt be barred from these labels and these labels shouldnt be made to bar people.

Now, that doesnt mean they should all be collapsed into one label, it means that this ‘whats the difference’ question is irrelevant and ultimately made to create restrictions. These restriction shouldnt exist. Labels are and should remain flexible terms we choose to apply to ourself. They should not be forced on us because we fit that definition ‘better’ than another, thats just weaponizing definitions. And honestly? I do see people do this quite a bit and its not right. Bi people will say they use that label because theyre capable of being attracted to anyone and people will tell them they should be using pan instead then. Thats not right. This happens not just to bi people but to all mspec people, and I want to make it extra clear that thats the exact kind of nonsense that happens when we insist that these things are rigid and inflexible and that the only reason we use labels is because we fit the definitions. Not true. Personal choice and attachment plays a huge role, and no one can or should force another to adopt a certain term. So, the idea that they have to be monumentally, quantifiably different and distinct only really plays into this idea. Are there distinctions? Yes. Are there reasons a person might choose one over the other? Yes. But BOTH of those things are ultimately person to person, not innate truths of the words themselves. The words are just loose ways to be mspec, and individual people will be mspec in their own way which is as varied as people can be, ie: infinite.

Again I dont think this means that its all one label or should be collapsed into one. I think no matter how you try to do that youre going to be elevating one mspec identity while insisting the others are inferior to it. The Bi+ Umbrella is just one example--no shade to people or organizations who choose to use it. I understand how its important from a legal standpoint to say ‘all mspec people fall under the B in LGBT+’ because otherwise there are no protections for us mspec folk who are not bi--I think it gets a bad rep from folks who dont get this and I think theres definitely BETTER ways to do it, but, sure, it exists for a reason which deserves to be acknowledged. What it does, however inadvertently, is imply that Bi is the pinnacle of being mspec and all the umbrella identities are less. Youll see a lot that Bi is a macro identity and that Pan, Ply, Omni are each microlabels because ‘they all fit the definition of bi’ but in truth each fits the definition of each other anyway. You could easily say that Omni is a macro identity and Bi Pan and Ply are microlabels because they each fit the definition of omni and youd be right. Its not a useful way to describe labels no matter which way you slice it. Theyre equals and the distinctions are as varied as the people who use them. Its one grand community of mspec people all using the same words in different ways and that should be celebrated! When we focus in on differences we just separate from each other and exclude and nitpick the words we use for ourselves and each other. It prevents us from forming solidarity as people who all face the same oppression and the same joy.

TLDR?: Theres not really any kind of distinction that matters since sexuality is different to different people. Its better to leave labels vague and flexible because thats how theyre used and doing the opposite reinforces gatekeeping and other negative ways to view being mspec. The differences arent identity based theyre person based and rooted in experience and not the literal definitions of words. Forming solidarity is much more important than picking out the minor ways we are different.

[asterythm]

I’m really sorry if you’ve already been asked this before so feel free not to answer if you don’t want to, but what’s your story about how you figured out your romantic/sexual orientation? I thought I knew what I was but I’m questioning a bit and it’s nice to hear other people’s experiences

hey nonnie!! i’m super sorry to disappoint, but i honestly... don’t have that much of a “story” specific to my own orientation, as much as i have one Big Turning Point? and gosh, i dont think i have ever publicly shared this before, so this might be more of a messy answer than you were hoping for. but!! i’ll do my best -- and i truly wish you all the best as well!! questioning can be tough, but i promise that you’re tougher. you’ve got this!!

without going into too many details: for probably the?? first ten years of my life?? i was absolutely The World’s Biggest Hopeless Romantic (spoiler alert: i still kind of am, but more on that later). like, unhealthily so. i started reading teen romance books sometime around second grade and it all just kind of erupted from there: i obsessed over love stories, i daydreamed about meeting “the one”, and -- as a ton of other aroaces have also talked about having done in the past -- i actively chose a male classmate to “crush on” every single year.

the years went by, and i became more and more aware of how different my “crushes” were than what everyone around me seemed to think they should be, and it absolutely tore me up inside. in my brain, romance was a big deal!! the absolute biggest!! and like. im not proud of this. but the amatonormativity was hitting haaard and i. kind of hated myself for it. so, uh oh, i started doing whatever i could to force myself to feel romantic feelings.

long story short, this.. came back to bite me in middle school after i screwed up a perfectly good friendship for the sake of a romance that was never there on my end. i’d rather not talk about the specifics if thats okay, but i bring it up because for better or for worse, that proved to be the aforementioned Turning Point for me and my identity -- i was kind of forced to step back and seriously acknowledge just how harmful my attitudes towards romance were, both for my own mental health and for the people around me. 

following that, some research led me to the term “aromantic”... which, admittedly, i rejected for at least a solid year re: romance was a huuuge deal in my brain, so the idea that i might be physically incapable of feeling romantic feelings was one of the scariest things imaginable. but time passed and, slowly but surely, i started letting myself lean into platonic love for my friends a little more.

as you might imagine, that was absolutely the best decision i’ve ever made. as i realized just how raw and real my love for my friends could really be, i was able to put my chase for the perfect romance on pause and really pour into my friendships in a way that i’d never been able to before. eventually, this gave me the courage to return to my research into the a-spectrum, at which point i stumbled across the microlabel “cupioromantic”, which describes a person who feels no romantic attraction but still desires a romantic relationship. that one became the first label i was able to feel comfortable (or at least not outright uncomfortable) identifying with -- it felt less intimidating than aromantic, you know? 

but the problem for me was that the reason it felt less intimidating was because i was still clinging so tightly to the hope that my aromanticism could be “fixed” one day, allowing me to engage in romance. that’s not to say microlabels are bad!! just that, in this specific instance, that label was encouraging a more toxic line of thinking for me personally. that’s why i’ve since shed the term “cupioromantic” and have decided to just identify with “aromantic” for now. it’s not like “aromantic” is a swear word that i need to censor out with fancy microlabels -- it’s just me. and i believe that, if not today, then one day i will be able to rest in that truth with peace and acceptance. in the meantime, there’s no use running from who i am, you know?

so yeah, there’s the aro part, and i sincerely hope that was helpful to read, nonnie. the ace part is this: Sex Yucky >:00