Just like the title says, and please try to avoid cheap jokes.
bisexual - attracted to both male and female genders or nonbinary, may have preferences for one gender or the other
pansexual - attraction irrelevant of gender
That’s the best I can understand it. Basically for pansexuals, gender is not a factor in attraction.
I guess as a metaphor it may be how one bisexual person is attracted to blondes, redheads, brunettes, etc but they prefer redheads when focusing on hair color, but they are open to different hair colors.
However the second pansexual person doesn’t notice or care about hair color when it comes to attraction.
A third heterosexual person is only attracted to blondes.
I think the concept of pansexual is to account for non-binary people.
Possibly also related: What people find attractive in men is often different than what they find attractive in women. A person attracted to men might like men with broad shoulders, for instance, and a person attracted to women might like wide hips. A bisexual person, then, might be attracted to both broad-shouldered men and wide-hipped women, while not being attracted to broad-shouldered women or wide-hipped men. A pansexual person, though, might have preferences for a particular shoulder or hip breadth, but that same preference would apply to both men and women.
To be honest, I don’t really know what these terms mean. There seems to be a wide range of sexual reactions among people… trying to condense them in to a few verbal categories may not be very useful?
Humans love to stuff nature into neat, little bins but she keeps climbing out of them.
That is pretty much my understanding, as well. A friend of mine identifies as pansexual, and she explains it as, “I like who I like.”
nevermind, off topic
I first heard the term pansexual in the 1970s, a long time before non-binary identification was widely used. Honestly, I didn’t know the difference between it an bisexual then, and I still don’t. To me it always sounded a little judgemental, as in “they’ll sleep with anyone.”
People say that about polyamory, too. They are wrong.
Indeed. “They could potentially be interested in sleeping with anyone” =/= “they’ll sleep with anyone.”
Not being strictly interested in only monogamous heterosexual relationships does not mean “promiscuous.”
At the risk of flouting the OP’s cheap-jokes ban, I present without comment this exchange between Stevie (a straight woman) and David (a pansexual man) from Schitt’s Creek:
Stevie: So, just to be clear, um… I’m a red wine drinker.
David: That’s fine.
Stevie: Okay, cool. But, uh, I only drink red wine.
David: Okay.
Stevie: And up until last night, I was under the impression that you too only drank red wine. But I guess I was wrong?
David: [nods knowingly] I see where you’re going with this. Um… I do drink red wine. But I also drink white wine.
Stevie: Oh.
David: And I’ve been known to sample the occasional rosé. And a couple summers back, I tried a merlot that used to be a chardonnay…
Stevie: Uh… okay.
David: …which got a bit complicated.
Stevie: Yeah, so… you’re just really open to all wines.
David: I like the wine and not the label.
Indeed. People can decide for themselves how to identify, and unless you’re somehow in a position to be in a potential relationship with them, what difference does it make?
(Which reminds me: when Gillian Anderson recently came out as pansexual there were all sorts of people on social media going “Woohoo! There’s a chance for me yet!”. No, Random Person On The Internet, you’ve still got the same chance of sleeping with her you had before: none. Saying you’re pansexual does not mean “please form an orderly queue at my bedside”.)
I don’t understand any of these terms (except straight and gay). I have one grandson who identifies as non-binary, although he seems to have a girl-friend. Another grandson identifies as asexual and he also has a close friend who is a female. Even odder is that he generally wears a skirt–on top of slacks. They both use they/them.
I was going to say that polyamory may be a type of pansexuality, or vice versa.
“Non-binary” is about their gender identity; it likely means that they feel that they don’t strictly or exclusively fit into either being male or female. If they has a girlfriend, that’s more about their sexual orientation than their gender identity.
“Asexual” is about sexual attraction; people who identify as asexual feel little or no sexual attraction to others. They may feel romantic attraction to a person, and in that respect, they might be gay, straight, bisexual, pansexual, etc., but that romantic attraction doesn’t necessarily mean that they are also sexually attracted to that person.
(There is another, related term: “demisexual,” which is typically used by people who only feel sexual desire for people with whom they are romantically involved.)
The fact that that grandchild also uses they/them, and wears skirts, may also mean that they do not identify as strictly male, from a gender standpoint.
Yeah, I experience (some degree) of bisexual attraction, but am not pansexual. It is different if you are male or masc vs female or femme, even if I am quite attracted to androgyny.
Funnily enough, my bi awakening was someone who then later transitioned to she/her pronouns after we drifted apart.
I wonder if there’s a term for someone who is only interested in relationships with one gender, but is sexually attracted to both. Like if a guy only dates women but would bone dudes only casually.
Like the protagonist of Mark Haddon’s A Spot of Bother:
He didn’t have a problem with homosexuality per se. Men having sex with men. One could imagine, if one was in the business of imagining such things, that there were situations where it might happen, situations in which chaps were denied the normal outlets. Military camps. Long sea voyages. One didn’t want to dwell on the plumbing but one could almost see it as a sporting activity. Letting off steam. High spirits. Handshake and a hot shower afterward.
It was the thought of men purchasing furniture together that disturbed him.
I identify as bi but not pan, and for me, the distinction is I seem to have no attraction to agender people.