by Dan Savage
on Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 8:11 AM
And that's not okay:
Just wanted to say, I bet the trans guy that CUTS wrote you about would be offended to be called bisexual, too. He most likely identifies as pansexual, a new-ish designation that I've not seen discussed in your column. You see, there are increasing numbers of trans people who identify outside the gender binary, and calling onself "bisexual" would exclude those people. Anyone who would go off about dating "humans" likely self-identifies as pansexual. Of course I've also met a number of people who identify only as "queer" and honestly I have no fucking idea what that means.
Another San Francisco Pansexual
I'm a great, big, gay-identified fag—I'm listening to A Little Night Music right now—but I happily ID myself as queer now and then for the all-inclusive hell of it. (Would someone like to explain to ASFP here what "queer" means? Thanks.) And when it comes to new sexual identities I fall in the more-the-merrier camp. But even I sometimes think we're just fucking with people. The endless proliferation of new sexual identities can feel less like an effort to find just the right word to describe every flower in our beautiful queer garden—sorry! the empowering term that every flower uses to describe itself!—and more like an effort to find new shit to be offended about. ("How dare you assume that I'm [insert perfectly reasonable assumed sexual identity here]! I happen to be a proud member of the [insert newly minted sexual identity that the person being admonished neglected to read the memo about here] community!") I can only imagine how straight people heteronormative cis-gendered non-queers must feel.