Most of the time when people say they have an unpopular opinion, it turns out it’s actually pretty popular.

Do you have some that’s really unpopular and most likely will get you downvoted?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    272
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Pansexual, polysexual, and omnisexual are all microlabels and are all subsets of bisexual. You don’t need more labels than gay, straight, and bi.

    Edit: I forgot about asexuals. But I specifically only care about bi subsets. They’re dumb, and you only need bi

    • pizza-bagel
      link
      fedilink
      881 year ago

      And asexual

      But I agree. The bi community already collectively decided we are trans and nonbinary inclusive. We don’t need to further separate it out.

        • NickwithaC
          link
          fedilink
          English
          411 months ago

          4th quadrant.

          • straight = attracted to opposite
          • gay = attracted to same
          • bi = attracted to both
          • ace = attracted to neither
          • Xanaus
            link
            fedilink
            111 months ago

            Oh the top comment meant that they don’t consider ace also to be granted a separate mention

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      291 year ago

      I agree. All the little bitty addages don’t make sense. You can be bi and still have preferences. Just keep it simple gosh dangit.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        151 year ago

        I think there’s value for folks in the community to have the hyper-specific labels. I’m saying this as a bi person who agrees that pan, Omni, etc are sub categories of bi.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      81 year ago

      Agree. I understand expressing acceptance of non hetero love so kids know that there are other options and they’re valued, but i don’t need to know what labels everyone has chosen, who they’re having sex with, or what is under their undies. And i believe that many people who are medically trans are chasing a masculinity or feminity that they feel is not allowed as a male or female and it’s sad that the stereotype is what they’re moving towards or away from instead of individuality. Also, kinda drunk, so probably disregard.

    • NormalC
      link
      fedilink
      English
      81 year ago

      Exactly, words that are synonyms to other words but have different linguistic backgrounds, history, and nuance should just be discarded.

      Now please, help me burn these thesauruses.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        81 year ago

        Oh please how old can these terms be

        Don’t answer that it’s probably older than I think isn’t it

        • NormalC
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -31 year ago

          No don’t worry. We can describe the totality of human sexuality and existence with three simple words: gay, straight, or bi. All these other labels confuse the straight people and therefore should be discarded to appeal to straight people’s infinite compassion.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      51 year ago

      Upvoted, but I have a slight disagreement. I think bisexual should actually be a label under pansexual. Bisexual doesn’t necessarily account for anyone outside the gender binary.

    • BlueFairyPainter
      link
      fedilink
      31 year ago

      Out of interest, why? Shouldn’t it be the other way around, that bi is a subset of pan?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        11 year ago

        Read the bisexual manifesto. Bi has always included nonbinary people. If you are attracted to all genders, both bisexual and pansexual are valid labels you can choose.

        • BlueFairyPainter
          link
          fedilink
          4
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Actually didn’t know that, even though I identify as bi lol. Pretty sure my other bi and pan friends didn’t know either from the kinds of discussions we’ve had. But then that’s just a bad choice linguistically, no? It’s very misleading because you literally have the terms bi and non-bi and you need to read some manifesto to understand that they’re not a contradiction. Meanwhile aside from the stupid overdone cookware joke, I think nobody ever questioned the meanings of terms like pan or omni, because they make sense linguistically.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            41 year ago

            Homosexual is attraction to the same gender; heterosexual is attraction to a different gender. The bi in bisexual is both of these, not attraction to two genders. Think of the bi flag, pink, purple, and blue: what do you think the colors represent? Nonbinary people have always been included in bisexual if you take some time to think about.

            • BlueFairyPainter
              link
              fedilink
              31 year ago

              I don’t doubt your textbook correctness or the historical correctness of this, and maybe I should stress that I am not trying to exclude anyone from the bi term, but at least in my anecdotal experience, these terms are mostly used “wrongly”, meaning that there is a lot of confusion. And the meanings of words change as people start using them with different intended meanings.

              Therefore, given the premise that we want to simplify things by cleaning up some redundant terms, I would prefer to keep the one whose meaning is intuitively clear to everyone. I just don’t see why - given bi, pan and omni all mean the same thing - one should choose the most misunderstood/misused term.

              Personally, I would just keep the terms and let people choose whichever they like, I’m just trying to entertain this discussion of choosing to keep only one of them and the pros/cons for each choice.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      22 months ago

      As a pansexual I feel that Bi and Pan have enough differences to both be justified while the others are micro labels (not invalid, just less useful as labels).

      But I recognize I’m drawing that line very conveniently for myself.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Here’s an unpopular opinion: you don’t need any labels at all. You love who you live, you fuck who you fuck, you can advertise what you’re looking for if you want to but all this identity business obscures the reality that humans are far more diverse and interesting than the boxes we build for ourselves.

      Most people who call themselves straight would fuck someone from their own gender if there weren’t cultural expectations against it hammered into them from and early age. Most people who call themselves gay would wander if they found someone they connected with. Very few of us rest at one end of any spectrum or matrix. Most of us are somewhere in the middle, and far more mobile than we might realize.

    • ObjectivityIncarnate
      link
      fedilink
      12 months ago

      Atheism isn’t a religion, likewise asexuality is not a sexual orientation, but the lack of one, I say.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      11 year ago

      I think this thinking falls into the common belief that “sexuality” and preference within “sexuality” are actually distinct things. I really think everyone’s sexual preferences are unique, and so even microlabels don’t do them justice. But I don’t think the purpose of labeling your sexuality is meant to be perfectly descriptive, it’s a way to connect with people over shared parts of their experience with sexuality and that can be as coarse or fine as you want it to be. You say there should be only straight, gay, and bi, but we could go even more broad and say there should only be cishet and queer.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      11 year ago

      If we’re splitting hairs, bi should be a sunset of pan.

      Also, there is some need for a fourth “none of the above” label…

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -41 year ago

      Not understanding what words mean isn’t an unpopular opinion, you’re just wrong

      Not about the first bit, that’s arguable

      You definitely DO need more labels than straight, gay, and bi. For example: asexual or sapiosexual, those don’t fit into any of the 3 you listed

      • Throwaway
        link
        fedilink
        31 year ago

        Sapiosexual means you have a preference for smart people. Its not a sexuality.

        • SpyingEnvelope
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          Can’t agree more. The microlabels are too much at this point. You do not need mix sexual orientation, which is the sex we are naturally attracted to, with having preferences, which are the qualities we find attractive in a person or a relationship. The two are completely separate.