Talk:pansexual

Deletion discussion

The following information passed a request for deletion.

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

---

pansexual

Adjective: Sense 2 seems redundant to Sense 1. Sense 3 looks like attributive use of the noun. Each purported adjective sense is supported by only one cite. DCDuring TALK 14:11, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Keep both and improve. The definition for sense #2 is worded in a way that seems redundant to sense #1, but if you look at the quotation, it's actually something quite different. (So, the definition needs to be completely rewritten, but the sense should not be removed.) Sense #3 does not seem to me to be attributive use of the noun; if it were, then the quotation's "pansexual group sex parties" would mean something like "group sex parties for pansexuals", which it clearly does not. (I could imagine the three senses potentially being merged somehow, using some "or"-s and "especially"-s, but I don't think we can just delete senses #2 and #3 and leave #1 to stand alone.) —Ruakh_TALK 14:54, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

The usage notes need to be referenced. - -sche (discuss) 20:00, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Striking as kept, needed improvements are not an RfD matter. bd2412 T 02:31, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

The actual omni-sexual

A leftist pansexual is a bisexual who doesn't focus on bisexuality but human relationships, but that's how they themselves present it. An actual pansexual is bisexual, bestiosexual and quodosexual (objectsexual not prisonsexual). Leftist pansexuals are biosexuals who are open to bestiality but never use the term bisexual because they don't separate humans, and never (as they claim openly) have sex with animals, because of freewill issues, non manipulation and respect.

We need reliable sources. I doubt half those words are in use. Equinox ◑ 13:51, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

What? Somepersonwholivesinahouse (talk) 23:48, 2 June 2019 (UTC)