#i also always want to assume ppl are arguing in good faith when more often then not they aren't and the disappointment makes

[snekdood]

theres lots of things i could do but being a political commentator or debate guy isnt it sdjsdvhjf

[nothorses]

Big kudos to you for being able to engage with ppl who are clearly trying to come at you in bad faith. Like you obviously didn't have to, but your reflection on that post from a year ago, it was great.

I had honestly felt weird and had to give up and check the person's blog instead to get a proper read on the intent. You're really almost inspiring tho? I'm just glad to know you're out here with me standing up for ourselves if that makes sense lol

that is extremely sweet, and I appreciate it a lot 💙

I will say that it's kind of more complicated than that. My first instinct is usually just based in emotion and past experiences, and there are times I have jumped to the conclusion that someone is coming at me in bad faith when they weren't, and times I've assumed people were coming at me in good faith when they weren't. And it always feels shitty to find out you're wrong.

That said, I think public conversations are different from private ones, and I tend to consider them that way; what can I use this opportunity to say? What will the larger impression of me be? It's not about this individual, it's about the people looking in from the outside.

I often make the wrong call and take things personally anyway, but like, this particular instance was definitely driven in part by the opportunity it presented. I knew this person wasn't going to listen to me; I also knew that people were going to see her response to my post anyway, and that not responding to it (or responding poorly) would ultimately look kind of shitty to people who actually were on the fence.

The opportunity to go back and genuinely re-evaluate some aspects of the post was honestly a good one, and I really do appreciate that kind of criticism. I also knew that doing so, and admitting fault where there was fault, would demonstrate that I am open to feedback and am responding thoughtfully and honestly. I didn't go on to argue her faulty conclusions because I wanted to disprove her points from the outset; I did it after taking some time to consider what she was saying, rereading and look further into things with that in mind, accepting my own mistakes, and deciding that regardless, her conclusion ultimately wasn't all that compelling.

I think it's easier said than done, and I would like to be better at catching myself and doing it this way more often. I want to be better at entering conversations to figure out what's true, rather than to posture at strength and try to "win". And I really appreciate that you think I did that well this time- thank you for taking the time to send me thoughtful and kind words.

[posi-pan]

hi sorry can i rant a bit? im just seriously so confused. i was on tumblr a lot when i was like 15 which is where i first encountered the term pansexual and it was like i clicked and i finally understood my sexuality. but recently ive been seeing so often, people claiming that being pan is biphobic and transphobic and bi erasure and all this shit, and i feel so bad. i would never purposely align myself with transphobia, but i also know in my heart that pan is the correct label for me. bi has never felt right. and all over the place now i am seeing people saying bi and pan are the same thing or pan is microlabel that is bi erasure and like what???? to my understanding, pansexuality is just a different sexuality. i cant understand how people say that equates to bi erasure. that's like saying iding as bi is lesbian erasure, like that's how nonsensical it is. and km so confused abt the definitions, and people arguing about what either truly means and hardliners tryna tell ppl that they've fucking id'd incorrectly like it's so much... genuinely i thought this community was more accepting than this but it's so much "discourse" and sniping like,,, it's to the point where im wondering if i should stop using pan as my label because if it truly is hurtful to trans people i dont want to use it but i just dont know... like my sexuality has always felt very fluid and stuff and i believed bi meant attraction to two genders only (i was 15 and i assumed the name meant what it sounds like it means sue me) so when i heard pansexual mesnt attraction to *all* genders i was like yes that! but now it's like oh no bi also means that and now ppl say it's based on preference or no preference, or it's about "seeing" genders and i just am wildly confused 😕 sorry about this awful nonsensical rant 😔

can you rant? of course you can rant!!

so pan is zero way transphobic or biphobic. it is not a harmful label. it is not harmful to anyone to identify as pan. pan is a harmless, good faith identity that has existed alongside bi for decades, much longer than the people making these false claims were even alive.

when it comes to definitions, it can get a bit murky because of the overlap and similarities. but bi is broadly defined to encompass pretty much every mspec experience, and pan is more specific. so, bi is two or more. bi can mean all, but it doesn’t for every bi person. it depends on the person.

pan is all, and it’s often specified further as attraction where gender isn’t what determines attraction or isn’t a factor in attraction at all; or “regardless of gender”. the latter definition is how pan is most commonly known.

i tend to explain it as bi can mean anything from two to all and pan always means all.

preferences and “seeing” gender isn’t part of either label’s definition. both bi and pan people can preferences or not, and feel like gender plays a part in their attraction or doesn’t.

but if you feel pan is the right label for you, you have every right to embrace it. you don’t have to explain or justify it to anyone. you don’t have to self-identify according to the opinions and demands of strangers online spreading and encouraging hate about queer people, because nothing they say is ever in good faith or based on any kind of facts.

i hope this helps!