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?

  • CheeseBread@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    323
    arrow-down
    26
    ·
    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@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      103
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 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.

    • Treefox@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 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.

      • June@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 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.

    • Today@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 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@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 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.

        • NormalC@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 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.

    • cosmicsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 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.

      • CheeseBread@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 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@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          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.

          • CheeseBread@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 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@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 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.

    • Wirlocke@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 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.

    • CeruleanRuin@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      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.

    • ougi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      subsets of bisexual

      What does bi cover that pan doesn’t :-)

    • Floey@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 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.

    • doggle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 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…

    • Kaped@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      I have no idea what all of these mean, I just ignore whatever they say

    • baphomet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      38
      ·
      1 year ago

      Exactly, every gay person I know IRL is disgusted by how the pride movement/LGBTQ+ whatever the hell they add on everyday, conduct themselves. It’s like a cult at this point, and I feel it paints a bad name on actual, normal, gay folk. These people who make being gay their entire identity, need to really consider some self awareness exercises.

      • Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Gay community can be brutal. It’s not the all-inclusive safe space some people like to think of it as. Gay or not they’re still all male and are mostly into manly stuff and if one is not for example into femine guys it’s not a taboo to say it out loud. Sexual harrasment is quite common aswell and probably wont get you canceled. Many would probably ban women from gay spaces if they could.

    • gamermanh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      48
      ·
      1 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