By your definition, which is apparently based entirely on root words, bisexual would be attraction to two SEXES, not genders. Meaning bisexuals could still be attracted to anyone in the spectrum of genders. Also, in the real world, many self-identified bisexuals are open to intersex or etc. folks as well as males and females, which is why "pansexual" is considered to be a redundant term.
Bisexual refers to being into one or the other, or both, but almost always lean towards one gender. True pansexuals have no proference of gender or appearance. The problem is pansexuality IS too board.. if you look at the definition on wikipedia there is THREE different ways it can go which is just flawed.
This is super funny to me because a lot of pansexuals claim that
they don't care about physical attractiveness in addition to gender, which is obviously bullshit (or because the person making the claim is ugly kekekekeke).
I don't. You ever heard the phrase "Don't judge a book by it's cover..." ? I take that in a literal sense regarding people. What I've learned is that they could be 'drop dead gorgeous' and be a complete and utter asshole in every sense of the word, and then someone that isn't super model material would be real and worth the time of a relationship. I've been with girls, guys, trans, IS, people younger than me and as much as 15 years older than me... I don't see why any of that matters. You don't get into a relationship because of how they look, but how they act.. and if you truly only base your relationships on how someone looks then you're a very shallow person.
Although I will say a LOT of 'self identified pansexuals' are not actually pansexual, but are either confused bisexuals, or just confused in general. I have met maybe 3-4 other pans that were that(my mate being one of them) and about 12 that were NOT pan.
Also you come across as rude and an ass from your posts, but I guess you were 'joking' as a few others say.
I'm going to assume his joke was more of a reference to pansexuality being such a controversial folly. Pansexuality is, as it has most likely already been mentioned, covered in the definition of bisexual. Words are words, and the various different words for sexualities hardly matter any more than the sexualities themselves.
So tomato, tamato in other words?
http://haha.nu/files/uploads/2009/goldberg-greenberg-iceberg/500.jpg
To some it's the same, or no different than bisexuality but to use it isn't. I've yet to meet one bisexual person that didn't heavily lean towards a single gender with a 'curiosity' to the other, but then maybe I've never met a real bisexual and only met people confused as to what they were.
I used to relate myself as 'bi' but as more and more time went by I didn't really fit in with other bi people who cared about appearance, physical traits, gender, ect... I simply didn't care about any of it. Wasn't till I looked up different sexualities and saw what I fit into that I saw pansexuality. Although I still feel as a whole it needs to be further defined.. rather than the broad "gender blind, ALL, or don't care" variations...