Tumgik
#anti panphobia
just had to unfollow/block someone for boosting bi/pan discourse in the Year Of Our Bored 2024....can we please stop wasting time yammering about the versions of other people's identities we make up in our heads please and thank you.
4 notes · View notes
Why are people homophobic, like what was your thought process when you decided that you're gonna spend way too much energy hating on a bunch of people for no reason
11 notes · View notes
hussyknee · 1 year
Text
I don't care how much you reblog ace positivity posts if you don't learn to recognize and call out every form of radical feminism in queer spaces. My community was decimated and our support systems destroyed because of this shit. Both we and the aromantic community have still barely recovered. Many of us won't feel safe in queer spaces ever again. And now I see the same vile shit now attacking trans mascs. Slapping "TERFs DNI" on your bio is worth fuck all if you're fine with keeping the door wide open to the same scumbaggery wearing different hats. If you aren't also dedicated to stamping out this culture of oppression Olympics, of trying to find acceptable targets by conflating individuals with oppressive systems, and making social justice into a cudgel to beat people into submission with, we're always going to be vulnerable to self-righteous bottom-feeders out only to validate their own trauma by hurting anyone within reach.
2K notes · View notes
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
218 notes · View notes
jasontoddssuper · 8 months
Text
I've never met any fandom as obsessed with making racist white characters into 'the REAL victims' and creating personalities out of their nothingness as the Harry Potter/Marauder's Era one.They convinced themselves that the faction who are a metaphor for n*zis(Slytherins)are 'discriminated against for being ambitious' when the reason everyone hates them is that they're bigots and bullies towards minorities and when there's exactly one canon poc amongst them.And now,because they're selfish enough to betray their trans siblings and jewish people and disabled people and like every other opressesd group in existence for their own nostalgia,they've turned the ones who never even appeared onpage into their 'unproblematic blorbos' because they're THAT desperate for white faves.It's just plain weird really
76 notes · View notes
bisexybruciewayne · 1 year
Text
LMAO imagine calling me, a trans woman, a TERF! Fuck off cunt!
Pansexual is literally a paraphilia that was recoined in 2002 in order to erase bisexuality and our history because people have always hated bisexuals and wanted to paint all of us as transphobic. Which you would know if you actually knew you're history, which clearly you fucking don't. I mean you're literally using a term that literally means "attracted to animals" per Freud's creation of it. Why you would want to use a term created by him is BEYOND me especially when bisexuality literally means attraction regardless of gender, something that the lot of you STOLE! Pansexuality has no actually history in regards of LGBT history, all of it is stolen and rehashed bisexual history.
But sure keep using a term that is actively harming the bisexual (and trans) community. But don't be surprised when we keep calling you out for it.
38 notes · View notes
chaos-in-one · 2 years
Text
Battleaxe bis are so funnily hypocritical because they'll yell at pan people about how bi historically included attraction to all genders so the pan label is biphobic
Yet you'll never see them acknowledge that historically multi gender attraction was included in lesbianism or say that the bi label is lesbiphobic because lesbianism historically included their attraction
They only care about history when it benefits their ideology
140 notes · View notes
mspec-defender · 2 years
Text
BAB’s (battle axe bisexuals) always claim that pansexuals have hurt bisexuals. Or that pansexuals have held back bisexual rights.
The problem is they can’t actually explain to me how pansexuals have ever hurt the bisexual community in any meaningful way. They assume that pansexuals are trying to somehow invalidate the identity of bisexuals.
This is just straight up wrong. As someone who identifies as bisexual I refuse to remain silent on pansexual erasure within the lgbt community. The amount of panphobia I see on tumblr needs to stop. This discourse gets us no where and we are literally just punching ourselves. Pansexuals are friends to bisexuals not enemies.
242 notes · View notes
furbearingbrick · 2 years
Text
discourse-poisoned lgbt+ zoomers after erasing/demonizing huge chunks of their own history, lying about the origins of good-faith identities, and suicide-baiting inclusionists:
Tumblr media
[Image ID: SpongeBob SquarePants and Patrick Star smiling with a ruined, burning city in the background. The caption reads: “We did it, Patrick! We saved gays!” End ID.] 
145 notes · View notes
demiaroacejolynekujo · 6 months
Text
Exclusionists need to stop weaponizing Bisexual people and Trans people as a way to justify their panphobia and their queerphobia towards Omni people, Ply people, and other Mspec people. Biphobic and Transphobic Mspec people do exist, and they deserve to be held accountable for being shitty toward Bi and Trans people. However, Exclusionists shouldn't be using that as an excuse to shame Mspec people for labeling themselves as Mspec and try to guilt trip them into identifying as Bisexual. No one should be forcing people to identify as a label they're not comfortable using as long as it's not for the wrong reasons.
8 notes · View notes
Terfs really be telling me, a bisexual person, that attraction to gender isn't a thing
And then they say they support lesbians
They actually only support lesbians who are attracted to females. And consider the sexuality of other lesbians to be invalid.
Some "feminists" they are when they use queer women as a tool for their transphobia and bigotry.
73 notes · View notes
hussyknee · 10 months
Text
A concerning number of y'all are reblogging posts by exclusionists who think bi/pan lesbians are a threat to "real lesbians". This is radfem rhetoric, even when its peddled by trans women and nonbinary lesbians. Which is ironic because Idk how you make the fear of a wholeass gender trans-inclusive.
If you're putting this shit on your blogs, you're no friend to aces, aros, bi and pan people, trans mascs or nonbinary people. We have had enough of being seen as threats to the queer community. Please reblog critically and with care.
110 notes · View notes
I originally came up with the phrase “live experiences > your rules” to talk abt transphobia against trans men. I’m now thinking abt how this phrase could 100% apply to many other identities that also get shut down when talking about their discrimination. Here’s some blinkies for y’all ^^
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
385 notes · View notes
pineapple-lover-boy · 2 years
Text
Remembering when I was younger and openly transphobic older men started messaging me and saying that pansexuality didn’t exist and that I was bisexual, later sending me death threats.
I identified as bisexual before but I was uncomfortable with it and when I heard that pansexuality was basically the same it immediately clicked for me.
I cried and was scared shitless that entire night and those to follow.
Reminder that all terfs/transandrophobes/biphobics/panphobics/etc. will use arguments like these and will not hesitate to call anyone invalid and spread harmful misinformation!!!
That moment stuck with me and I occasionally wonder if they are coming to get me. To kill me off. To make sure I’m the first one that goes once they “get into power”.
Anyone who invalidates anyone else’s identity and sexuality, I don’t care what it is, is an extremely harmful person and will come after you and try to manipulate others to blame you, a single person, for all the wrong doings in the world/pertaining to the subject.
Fuck those guys and fuck whoever agrees with them.
11 notes · View notes
posi-pan · 2 years
Text
let’s talk about panphobic dogwhistles
A panphobic dogwhistle is coded/subtle to avoid opposition. These statements aren’t inherently panphobic and not everyone who shares them is panphobic.
“You can identify as pan, if... I support you being pan, but...”
This create hoops for pan people to jump through in order to be supported. But support and respect contingent on us internalizing and regurgitating panphobia isn’t genuine. We don’t trade autonomy for a sliver of pseudo acceptance.
“New labels damage the community. It doesn’t matter if a label is valid, it matters if it’s useful, materially different, and serves a political purpose.” And other anti self-identification/individualism statements.
This targets any label that isn’t The Four. Labels are, and always have been, useful if they help someone understand and communicate their feelings, identity, and experiences. We don’t owe our queerness to anyone, and we don’t have to use our queerness as a calculated strategy for anything.
What damages the community is creating an environment where any kind of difference in identity/language/expression or rebellion against norms/status quo/rules is met with hostility, fostering fear and distrust of the people who are supposed to support and nurture that self-discovery and expression.
“All genders/regardless of gender has always been the definition of bi.”
This often perpetuates the counterfactual ideas that pan “stole” The bi definition and isn’t necessary because “bi already means that”. This is also ahistorical biphobia; there’s never been one “true” definition of bi (this isn’t even the common community one) and it erases bi history/people who don’t relate to it.
Using scare quotes around pan.
Putting pan in quotes when it isn’t necessary is often a way of disrespecting its legitimacy, casting doubt/judgement, especially if pan is the only one in quotes.
“Bi has always included trans/nonbinary people.”
This is often used to falsely claim pan was created because “biphobes thought bi didn’t include trans/nonbinary people, so pan doesn’t need to exist”. (Binary bi texts aren’t universal, but there are plenty that speak to a reality that affected people and contributed to the current more inclusive language.)
“Mspec labels overlap but the distinction matters to some and that’s okay.”
I’ve seen this said so many times in response to people asking what bi and pan mean and how they relate to and differ from each other. What good is it to tell people the distinction matters while avoiding explaining what that distinction is? Ultimately this statement discourages any dialogue about mspec labels.
“Bi is an umbrella term that includes pan.”
The bi umbrella was once genuine inclusion of all mspec people, and activists/orgs use it, so most people don’t see it as anything else. But when bi only content has “bi+” slapped onto it, it becomes meaningless and performative. Panphobes also use it to argue pan doesn’t need its own, specific visibility.
“When a character ‘just likes people’ or is ‘attracted to all genders or regardless of gender’ they aren’t automatically pan instead of bi.”
I’ve experienced this from panphobes who simply assume pan interpretations of pan definitions/common pan explanations must be because of biphobia. But it’s a big, false, and purposely bad faith leap of logic to fuel the panphobic narrative that pan people are always misrepresenting bi.
“Pan people need to let bi people have something and stop making everything about themselves.”
This might seem like advocating for bi only content/events for the sake of bi visibility/community, but it’s often malicious exclusion of pan people who’ve always been included. We aren’t “invading” or “derailing” anything by being in spaces we’ve always been in, or by sharing a bi post because we relate to it.
“Read the Bi Manifesto.”
A lot of the time, people say this because they think the manifesto states the true definition of bi and proves pan is unnecessary/biphobic. However, the full text explicitly states there isn’t one true definition of bi and the group who published it explicitly supports all mspec people and identities.
“People identify as pan due to internalized biphobia.”
This masks panphobia with concern for internalized biphobia. Pan is being written off as a product of biphobia under the guise of wanting bi people to embrace being bi. Pan people are being equated to bi folks who just haven’t unlearned biphobia enough to embrace being bi, when that isn’t the case.
“All pan people are bi, but not all bi people are pan.”
This appears to be an easy explanation of bi/pan, borrowing from “all squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares”. But queerness isn’t geometry and doesn’t work like that. The only pan people who are bi are the ones who also identify as bi. We can’t box queerness into simple, universal categories.
“Analyze why you’re uncomfortable with being associated with bi people or being called bi.”
Of course, pan and bi are associated, but it’s never mere association these people are referring to. Pan people are vilified and wrongly painted as biphobic for criticizing the erasure and mislabeling of our identity.
“Bi and pan people need to stop fighting each other, both are valid and neither is -phobic.”
This implies the “fighting” is equal. But there are popular bi accounts dedicated to panphobia, “battleaxe bi” was coopted for panphobia, a major bi org spreads panphobia, panphobic bi authors/activists are praised, and researchers subsume pan data into bi data. Biphobia from pan people just is not on the same scale as panphobia from bi people.
This is not to disregard/downplay biphobia from pan people. It’s just important to acknowledge the reality, severity, and disparity of the situation. Erasing that by saying or implying it’s just a silly mutual argument about which word is better is disingenuous at best, and malicious misrepresentation at worst.
“I’ve never seen a definition of pan that isn’t biphobic/transphobic.”
Panphobes involved in bi/pan “discourse” saying this aren’t hoping to learn the actual (read: non bigoted) definitions of pan, they’re saying there aren’t any definitions of pan that aren’t biphobic or transphobic, because they believe pan is inherently biphobic and transphobic.
“Behaviorally/scientifically bi.”
“Behaviorally” and “scientifically” bi are used to categorize people based on so-called innate, universal indicators of being bi. Both say pan people are actually bi, hiding identity policing/erasure behind science. Funnily enough, researchers have said it’s hard to determine who is “actually bi” because “individuals determine this for themselves”. In other words, there aren’t innate or universal indicators, we simply are who we say we are.
So. I’m sure there are plenty more examples I’ve missed, and if you have any please send them my way! (I tried to make this as short as possible, so if you’d like me to elaborate on any of these, let me know and I’ll happily do so!)
But I hope this will encourage you to think a bit deeper about the things people say and the possible intent behind it before sharing, as well as be more invested in supporting pan people and trusting us when we tell you something is being said to spread panphobia.
389 notes · View notes