Is the label 'panromantic/sexual' scary?

[Neu]

There is a possibility that I may be panromantic, and at the moment, I'm not looking to date, or be sexually involved with anyone. But there seems to be this strange idea that panromantics/sexuals are people who are open to have a relationship with basically 'anyone,' which they aren't. Panromantics have only a selection of people who they like. Just as heteromantics/sexuals don't fall in love with everyone of the opposite gender, and homoromantics/sexuals don't fall in love with everyone of the same gender, and biromantics/sexuals don't fall in love with everyone of both genders.

And as for pansexuals, there seems to be this wrong assumption about them. I'm not sure if everyone knows Deadpool from the Marvel comics, but he was confirmed to be omni/pansexual. While it's cool that Marvel comics are trying to incorporate different sexual orientations into their comics, the problem I have is that he's depicted as this sexually promiscuous guy. I am worried that such representations about pansexuals is going to create this wrong stereotype of pansexuals, as being these sexually promiscuous people.

I am asexual and by no means pansexual (though panromantic possibly), but the prefix of sexual orientations and the corresponding romantic orientations (i.e. 'pan') is going to have connotations, and these connotations will influence people's views on both the sexual and romantic orientations with the same prefix.

For example, there is a stereotype that all homosexual men must be effeminate. Hypothetically speaking, this stereotype could even extend to people who call themselves homoromantic.

I don't want people to think of panromantic/sexuals as these... romantic/sexual predators ready to prance on anyone they meet, because they're not.

And yes, you can tell me that I should not worry about what other people think, just be myself, but I care about people like me. I care about the panromantic community, just as I care for the asexual community. And these stereotypes aren't going to affect just me, but members of this community as well. I'm just a little angry at how misunderstood the terms panromantic/sexuals are, and how that might affect me and other panromantics/sexuals.

So just a question to see how far this stereotype/view on panromantics/sexuals have spread. Do you people find it scary when you see someone who labels themselves as a panromantic/sexual, or did you at some point?

[Sci]

I once labled myself as Bisexual and Panromantic. There was not really any infection of people being rude towards me because of this. Another time I almost identified as Bisexual Polyromantic but chose not to for a strange reason. I have also thought about identifying as Polysexual or Pansexual in the past but chose not to as I had clung to the term Bisexual so long that it had grown along with me.

[truthisbest7]

I'm still trying to figure this stuff out....sorry.

[Copper]

Scary? No...

I see how often times people who identify as bi or pan are portrayed as promiscuous (I'm looking at you, Jack Harkness). And it is a stereotype. But I wouldn't equate promiscuous as scary. I wouldn't be scared of someone who actually is promiscuous. Though I do agree that the stereotype that does exist should not be encouraged.

[hdfskjfsdshdsajfhaksd]

I absolutely don't find it scary. At one point, I didn't really understand it, but I didn't find it scary.

I hate stereotypes, too :( They're such bull! And they just make people afraid of what they don't understand, or make them not want to understand.

[Guest]

So just a question to see how far this stereotype/view on panromantics/sexuals have spread. Do you people find it scary when you see someone who labels themselves as a panromantic/sexual, or did you at some point?

Yes. To the point that even if pan-XYZ were to describe me correctly, I still wouldn't personally choose to go by that label.

While I know now what it actually means, and can and do use the word in that sense, the knee-jerk association to the prefix "pan-" (= everything) still is Anything That Moves, which of course carries the implied fear/danger that the pan person is planning to come onto me. I still have to consciously tell myself "relax, it's not at all what it sounds like". Comes far to late for the first person I've read to identify as pansexual (without explaining it)... I never answered to any of her posts again in the forum where she came out like that, trying to "stay under her radar". Looking back, it's kinda sad... but I can't blame myself for it. The association, factually wrong as it turned out to be, still is a logical enough one to make.

I dearly wish there was a better word for "bi-, and rejecting the binary", that didn't come loaded with these unfortunate implications.

[RK800]

Scary? Nah, stereotypes cause problems any way you look at it and there is basically a stereotype for everyone:
Heterosexual: Homophobic bigot.

Bisexual: Gay and in denial.

Homosexual: Flamboyant/butch.

Asexual: Prude/abused.

Pansexual: Uh....the opposite of prude.

Demisexual: Picky.

Gray-Asexual: "Special snowflake".

[poetryinmyveins]

It is a label I use for my sexual orientation. I have not come out because for me it is scary but not because of the stereotypes associated with it. instead it is because I'm just not in a safe environment. In my opinion there are always going to be people who personify and defy stereotypes and those who are a mix of the two. I really think it is unfair towards bisexuals and pansexuals because other sexual orientations are capable of promiscuity. Le sigh. If I were out I'd probably just roll my eyes or educate everyone who tried to streotype me but that's besides the point

[xserpx]

I think the stereotype will disappear when/if pansexuality becomes wider known. Most people these days just know that gay men aren't all effeminate, despite what the TV tells them. In the case of pan-, I feel like it's a victim of the old semantics debate, where too many smug idiots were like, "well, 'pan' means 'all', which obviously means you want to have sexual/romantic relations with all people.", without bothering to listening to what pan- people are actually saying. It's a dumb stereotype, and the only way it can be fixed is by people not subscribing to it, which thankfully shouldn't be too hard :P.

I personally feel very sorry for bi- and pan- people who are seen as greedy or not very picky. It's awful to see anyone's sexual/romantic identity get bulldozed over by the fragile egos of ignorant people, but bi- and pan- people seem to be the most misunderstood and scorned due to the idea that they might cheat on their partner (like heterosexuals don't <_<). It's ridiculous.

[Janus the Fox]

The only thing pan means to me is that I don't take into account someone's gender at all if or when considering someone who's attractive or consider a relationship, I'm not pan romantic nor sexual though.

[deltaX]

I personally don't consider panromantic or pansexual people scary. They're just people with a different romantic/sexual orientation to me. Some pan people might be promiscuous, but there are also others who are not, so I wouldn't really judge anyone based on that stereotype.

Unfortunately though, I do have to agree that there are stereotypes against pan people, and not everyone will be accepting. If you ultimately decide panromantic is the right label for you, I hope you do not encounter too many judgmental people!

[scarletlatitude]

I don't think they are scary. I think they are different from me, but that's not a bad thing. :)

I do agree that panromantic/pansexual people are depicted as overly promiscuous. Society does seem to equate pansexual with hyper sex drive. It is unfortunate. Hopefully we can start to break down those stereotypes.

I've heard that they are going to make a Deadpool movie. I wonder if they will highlight pansexuality... If they did it properly, that would be awesome.

[KendraPM]

I don't, but that's because the first time I heard the phrase I was fairly young and thought it was really sweet, this idea of being able to look for love in, what I thought of a the time, a fairly large pool of people. I get that we all still have our attractions etc, but at the time, I saw it as (pardon my lame metaphor, but it's the best I can come up with so late) "hetero females can find love in this bucket of fish, hetero males this one, homo females this one" and so on and so forth, but pans got to look in all the buckets to find someone. Even if they didn't want every fish they saw, they still got to look in all of them to see if there was someone they did want...if any of that crazy mumbo-jumbo make sense. (If you think that's crazy, you should hear my strange way of describing sexual orientations to people, lol)

If it helps, I'm pretty sure the first fictional character I saw as panromantic (and I still think she is, since she was never declared otherwise) is Willow Rosenberg from Buffy the Vampire Slayer. And people loved her

[xserpx]

If it helps, I'm pretty sure the first fictional character I saw as panromantic (and I still think she is, since she was never declared otherwise) is Willow Rosenberg from Buffy the Vampire Slayer. And people loved her

It annoyed me that after Willow got with Tara people called her a "lesbian" rather than "bi/pansexual". It just seemed like bi-erasure to me. IDK. But Willow/Tara was a gorgeous relationship nonetheless :D

[Guest]

If it helps, I'm pretty sure the first fictional character I saw as panromantic (and I still think she is, since she was never declared otherwise) is Willow Rosenberg from Buffy the Vampire Slayer. And people loved her

It annoyed me that after Willow got with Tara people called her a "lesbian" rather than "bi/pansexual". It just seemed like bi-erasure to me. IDK. But Willow/Tara was a gorgeous relationship nonetheless :D

Sorry to burst your bubble, Willow herself simply identified as gay in S6&7. Canonically, being into guys turned out to have been just a phase for her (much as she did have feelings for Xander, Oz, and Giles previously...). One of the strongest signs, except for her self-identification, is how she handled the sitch with RJ's (was that his name?) glamoured sports jacket. When your first idea when falling for a guy is "I'll transmute him into a woman", that's not bi/pan, it's plain old Lesbian.

(Feel free to blame Joss Whedon for digging into unfortunate tropes, though - No Bisexuals, Psycho Lesbian, and Bury Your Gays / Dead Lesbian Syndrome, especially.)

[KendraPM]

If it helps, I'm pretty sure the first fictional character I saw as panromantic (and I still think she is, since she was never declared otherwise) is Willow Rosenberg from Buffy the Vampire Slayer. And people loved her

It annoyed me that after Willow got with Tara people called her a "lesbian" rather than "bi/pansexual". It just seemed like bi-erasure to me. IDK. But Willow/Tara was a gorgeous relationship nonetheless :D

Sorry to burst your bubble, Willow herself simply identified as gay in S6&7. Canonically, being into guys turned out to have been just a phase for her (much as she did have feelings for Xander, Oz, and Giles previously...). One of the strongest signs, except for her self-identification, is how she handled the sitch with RJ's (was that his name?) glamoured sports jacket. When your first idea when falling for a guy is "I'll transmute him into a woman", that's not bi/pan, it's plain old Lesbian.

(Feel free to blame Joss Whedon for digging into unfortunate tropes, though - No Bisexuals, Psycho Lesbian, and Bury Your Gays / Dead Lesbian Syndrome, especially.)

She may have been homosexual, but that doesn't necessarily exclude her being panromantic. Part of why I thought she was panromance was since she was affect by RJ's (yes, that was his name ;P I'm a bit of a BtVS nerd) jacket, she could have romantic feelings for men, but her sexual attraction was primarily with women, hence why she wanted to turn him into a woman. I don't know. The whole thing was confusing. As much as I adored her and Tara, her and Oz had some real feelings, feelings she claimed had never gone away, and she felt never would go away. So her suddenly being only for the ladies seemed strange. Mostly I chalk it up to Joss's claim that he wanted Xander to have the big coming out in season four, only for the network to nix that so he fell back onto having Willow take over that plot line.

Either way, it's a fictional TV show and people could probably make all kinds of claims for any of the character's sexualities.

[kiaroskuro]

It's not only that promiscuity stereotype that's bugging me ...

It also annoys me that people often assume a strong link between bi-/pansexuality and polyamory. I don't condemn other people's polyamorous relationships, of course - it's just that I personally would never agree with having one myself.

[TheStarrySkai]

Hmm. Scary, no. Annoying, yes. I do hate that stereotype very much. It shouldn't exist.

[Beyourownspotlight]

I'm panromantic, and I've never thought of that before.

I'm aware that people tend to think of bi/pansexual people as these really promiscuous people, and I suppose by association the romantic equivalents. But that being said, no one has ever made such a comment to me (but then again, I'm only out to a handful of friends, the majority of which I've never met in person --internet friends, and people I've met through Aven).

To me, the panromantic part of me just means that I don't rule anything out due to gender/sex, or gender expression. I don't crush on every single person that I meet. I might have little fleeting crushes often, but almost as soon as I realise I have it, it's gone again. It takes a lot for me to form a 'proper' crush, and it makes me one of the most awkward people to exist.

[_stillahomosapien_]

As a panro demi-ace myself, I personally think that the label pan- just means I can tolerate a relationship with an agender/neutrois or mtf/ftm transgenders. Like if a hot "guy" tells me he's genderqueer, I can accept that.

[Kulukan]

Here I was thinking that there was this group of people who were really.... really into cookware.

[whitesphere]

My best friend (female) of over 10 years is panromantic/sexual and she doesn't scare me. So why should someone being panromantic and sexual frighten me?

She explained to me that pansexual means "I fall in love with someone based on their personality, and can be sexually attracted to either gender."

So, if she saw an attractive man and fell in love with his personality she could be with him. And if she saw an attractive woman and fell in love with her personality, she could be with him.

I've never thought that means "I want to have sex with everyone."

[wishystar]

i consider myself panromantic asexual and to almost everyone, my orientation is an oxymoron. it is really hard to explain.

being panromantic, in my understanding is being "romantically" open to All kinds of people, regardless of their orientation.

I believe pans also have certain types they are drawn to, or repulsed by. like for example, a panromantic person admired a certain personality type that anyone could have regardless of sexual/romantic orientation. after all, we also know how to evaluate people by their physical appearance or personality or attitude or life choices or whatever you can think of.

being an asexual means i cannot be sexually attracted to others.

i am not scared if someone labeled themselves as pan, or to label myself as such.

[EggplantWitch]

If you feel that 'panromantic' describes you, you should use it - and forget what anyone else thinks, they don't matter. The stereotype will disappear the more people are educated about it, either through people like you who are panromantic/sexual and aren't promiscuous or through positive representation in the media (I'm a writer; I'm working on it). The more people hear about it, the more it will become 'normal' and not something worth making a fuss about.

You just have the bear the stigma until that point, I'm afraid to say :\ Just like everyone else who isn't heterosexual. Dismal but true.

[Stained Glass]

I never thought of it that way, but then again, I am panromantic. I think that with time and education the stereotype will greatly lessen

[Alex Crosswhite]

When I was younger, one of my ex boyfriends told me he had a friend who was pansexual. By pansexual, he meant the guy was attracted to anyTHING, 'parently he f**ked a tree (or so I was told...)

But i don't think there's a fear so much as an ignorance and stereotype.

I selfidentify as pansexual, although I used to identify (still flip flop sometimes, but i dont talk about my sexual orientation much now) as bisexual, until i realised there were more than 2 genders.

that being said,there is a stigma attached to bisexuality (that i learned by my orientation), being on the fence, being gay, being fake, being a slut, etc. whereas pansexual (that i learned of others orientations) is more being "unique" (as in, like hipster) about being bi, being a slut, being into everything, being into pans (how could you not? all that metal and shininess is such a... turn on ;P ) People need good, realistic examples of pan, a and bisexuality, because right now, all they have is stereotypes to go off of. Seeing dumb blondes in movies is funny, but we all know its not really true, same with effeminate gays. It's just going to have to take time.

Scary? No...

I see how often times people who identify as bi or pan are portrayed as promiscuous (I'm looking at you, Jack Harkness). And it is a stereotype. But I wouldn't equate promiscuous as scary. I wouldn't be scared of someone who actually is promiscuous. Though I do agree that the stereotype that does exist should not be encouraged.

Oh, Jack Harkness *sigh* that man would do any creature that moved. But we still love him. I think, generally, whovians tend to be a bit more open minded towards differences as a whole, so hopefully the portrayal will not be taken too seriously.

[Cat7]

I think, it's scary, that people could get my romantic orientation that wrong... Because I don't want to be hit on!

[nonirose]

I always thought of myself biromantic and then after researching the different asexual "labels" I find I'm panromantic asexual. I am mistaken as someone who just has fetishes or just haven't found the right one to rock my world to say it nicely. I'm 55; not going to happen. It's hard to find others like me in CA and hopefully when I finally move to Oregon I can find meetup groups near.

I'm asked how I can be romantic or love without sex and I used the quote I heard here or somewhere, "if you can have sex without love why can't you have love without sex?"

On a silly note, I have a crush on "Venus" from "Sons of Anarchy." I know she really isn't transgendered in real life but it seems so and the character is eloquent and so real.

[Philip027]

It's "scary" in the sense that nobody is going to know what it means outside of the internet. And people naturally fear what they don't understand.

[Dawnpaw]

I haven't come across people who think pansexuality/romantic is scary or bad, but my friends and family are very open and accepting. I do know that some people think pansexuals and bisexuals are more promiscuous though <_<