Pansexuality is not being sex-positive. It doesn't have to do solely with sex. For instance, someone can be a homosexual and a virgin. The same applies to pansexuality. As for how far I'd go, I'd go anywhere with anything but my vagina. Maybe that doesn't meet up to tekla's standards of "wild and crazy," but it's further than most of the people I know would go and since I am a man I don't see why I have to use my vagina to be "sexually open."

I didn't say that pansexuality was equivalent to being sex positive.  I said that being sex positive is not equivalent to promiscuity.

Okayy...

Then why is everyone arguing about this?

No no no, you're all wrong. It means wanting to have hot steaming action with frying pans! Like, duh. Everyone knows that.




Okay, seriously, could we just drop this, please?

Quote from: Ciarquin on September 23, 2008, 11:42:37 PMNo no no, you're all wrong. It means wanting to have hot steaming action with frying pans!

You win. 

The difference between 'bi-sexual' and 'pansexual' as it was explained to me once is that bi-sexual is still pretty much limited to humans.  Pansexuality embraced the myriad sexual expressions open to people and try to be positive about that those other kinds of expressions including - but not limited to - fetish play, role playing, power exchanges and the like.

i always heard it where bisexual was men and women. but that doesnt really include the neithers, the both, and the in-betweens.  and pansexuality does.

And even expressions far beyond that.

Quote from: Chet on September 24, 2008, 06:03:16 PM
i always heard it where bisexual was men and women. but that doesnt really include the neithers, the both, and the in-betweens.  and pansexuality does.

This is the expression that I learned and it is the reason I call myself such.

The myriad sexual expressions open to people... does that include bestiality?

Anyway, the dude said he was pansexual, not a nymphomaniac.

beastiality is generally condemned by the pansexual folks, based on the fact that an animal can't consent.  same reason for things like necrophilia and pedophilia.

Agreed that consent is critical for living beings.  But there are ranges of behavior beyond all that human stuff, or changing the numbers, the performance aspects - and you don't have to be a nympho, but most of the pansexuals I know are not exactly shy and modest and undersexed either.

Quote from: tekla on September 24, 2008, 10:59:13 PM
Agreed that consent is critical for living beings.  But there are ranges of behavior beyond all that human stuff, or changing the numbers, the performance aspects - and you don't have to be a nympho, but most of the pansexuals I know are not exactly shy and modest and undersexed either.

god knows my stress level would be lower. 

Its very stress free for the most part.  You pretty much have to give up all notions of modesty and self and place your trust in the larger group or that different mindset.

Oh Tekla, I'm not very sexually inhibited.  I'm not shy, I'm not freaked out.  I just cannot get down with penis.  Doesn't turn me on.  Isn't attractive to me.  Just...   very much not my thing.  And I trend toward being a serial monogamist, so that kills the multiple partners thing for me as well.  I found myself a ->-bleeped-<- chasing sexually-uninhibited woman with a high sex drive.  I'm happy.

I'm just safe and monogamous. I like sex as much as anyone else, and I like humans of any gender or sex or what have you, but I stick with one person. Uninhibited doesn't mean careless and stupid.

Hey, what ever floats your boat, the discussion started with someone referring to themselves with that designation without the amount of experience that one would assume when into such a choice for themselves.  They may well have tendencies in that direction, though I doubt it, its pretty libertine stuff for the most part, but its very real, and you have to pretty go before you know.

Yup, and I have to say I agree on that point.

Whatever.  I'll still be at Folsom all day volunteering for CUAV. 

Quote from: Mister on September 25, 2008, 01:32:37 AM
Yup, and I have to say I agree on that point.

Whatever.  I'll still be at Folsom all day volunteering for CUAV. 

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/N5Ts4M3irWM&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x006699&color2=0x54abd6"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/N5Ts4M3irWM&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x006699&color2=0x54abd6" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Folsom Street Fair, not Folsom Prison.