Layla Moran: Potential Lib Dem leadership candidate becomes first MP to come out as pansexual

‘Pangender’ also used to be a thing, until someone pointed out identifying as all genders is colonialist as some are culture specific (2-spirit, etc) and only open to people from the culture. So suddenly these people’s innate and personal gender identities changed to accommodate this helpful call-out from Tumblr.

What's with the bleddy pansexual label? It just makes people sound as though they want to sleep with everything, including inanimate objects.
My DD (14) did actually think that's what it meant. She told me a girl at school was pansexual and fancies objects. No wonder so many kids are confused!

Layla Moran
Will be mincemeat in Pan
And DV'll be yesterday's news
The leadership race
Could be Layla's to face
And those souls will be left to abuse

I can't see Layla Moran taking the party in the right - more mainstream - direction tbh - all that seeing souls stuff. The media will make mincemeat out of her, just as they did Swinson.

I wonder if the people who post this sort of ahit believe they are in the mainstream?

(person with Twitter bio of
🏳️‍🌈 || 20 || genderqueer || #pansexual || peace is cheaper ||🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿)

There's hardly anyone else left who hasn't already had a go.

Seems that way kittens.

A self confessed Dv Abuser and a deflector of her choice in a partner

Is this genuinely the best the LibDems have in terms of potential leadership candidates?

Yeah Lang. Dead cat and that

Moran trying to deflect on her choice of partner who was suspended from LibDems and then left

And also her Dv when she hit her former partner

That’s a leader

Ariad the terms for ‘not trans’ are woman, women, man, men, girl, boy.

Sexequality

"cis" (for sake of definition)

You mean women who identify with harmful sex stereotypes? And therefore are at fault for having to deal with them?

No I did not. I don't actually understand your interpretation although I assume some point is being made.

I was using the term to make clear "pansexual" encompasses all options including the option of "not trans"

Why did Swinson sign off the expenditure underpinning the legal threats to openDemocracy? Where do Moran and Cobb fit into the narrative?

It's interesting, I wonder if there is less of a journalistic appetite for digging into the LDs now they are largely irrelevant for the next few years? I say this because the Greens seemed to have lost the plot entirely but nothing was newsworthy until a paedo rapist in a loft got involved.

It's infuriating that they feel they can act so audaciously in the public eye and get away with it. Shows a total lack of respect for the public.

Obviously this thread should remain focussed on the actual political scandal

I'm trying, believe me.

Why did Swinson sign off the expenditure underpinning the legal threats to openDemocracy? Where do Moran and Cobb fit into the narrative?

A lesbian couple who've recently finished A levels told me that bisexual yp people in their school were bullied as there was a belief they were "easy." I hope that's not why and how pansexual came into being.

That's the sort of unpleasant subtext I get from Moran's definition of 'pan' as 'love for an individual person for who they are and not their gender or sexual identity.' - because if that's what Pan is, what is she implying about others and particularly bisexuals?

I not certain I understand the difference between bisexual and pansexual.

One thing I agree with - once MPs start identifying as panssexual, it will cease to be cool.

A lesbian couple who've recently finished A levels told me that bisexual yp people in their school were bullied as there was a belief they were "easy." I hope that's not why and how pansexual came into being.

Still don't understand it.

I take it to mean the person is saying they are happy, provided the other person is right, to consider straight, gay, male female, "cis" (for sake of definition) and trans partners.
In my limited experience, everyone I've known as pansexual has been opposite sex partnered. So with that limited experience in mind, I think "it's a one off!" can be true in some cases.
Thinking about it from a personal point of view, (and bearing in mind us homosexuals have been guilty of biphobia in the past) it still feels like the same sex partner has an uphill battle to fight.
If it's all about the person and there is no physical attraction without a personality match (for want of a better phrase) then any interpersonal issues become a big deal. Your partner finds nothing about your actual body particularly attractive but your personality pleases them? Phew. Hard work.
I'm sure most people have had arguments with their partners but still fancied them rotten. Is that shallow? Is physical, visual, sexual attraction a shallow thing? Ever had a crush on someone you dislike?
A bisexual person makes a statement - they are sexually attracted to some men and some women. It says "I find the same sex sexy".(I think it's around 85% who are opposite sex partnered however).

A pansexual person states they require a personality match - I wouldn't be surprised if that group had a similar percentage, or higher, of opposite sex partners.

And for me that's the issue, firstly pansexuality as an idea suggests the rest of us give in to our base desires without any mental, social or spiritual interaction. I find that a bit insulting. Secondly in practice if most pansexuals are opposite sex partnered they are straight. The world perceives and treats them as straight, regardless of their self identities, and as such those people don't experience what (for example) homosexuals in a homophobic environment do.

Obviously this thread should remain focussed on the actual political scandal and I've gone off on a tangent sorry. Stealing data, selling it, faking emails and threatening journalists are not good looks, and neither is domestic violence.

Me: "I wonder if they're going to get that "independent" investigation company (Veritas?) back in, for another whitewash they can sweep under the carpet."

Pink: "That was the Greens, wasn't it? I don't think the Lib Dems have bothered with any of that."

You could be right, soz. I was thinking of Challenor and I thought they'd had warm welcomes and dealings with the LD (as well as Greens?)

"cis" (for sake of definition)

You mean women who identify with harmful sex stereotypes? And therefore are at fault for having to deal with them?

Saying you're pansexual as it's "about the person, not the gender", just screams (internalised) homophobia to me. "I'm still straight, honest, this is just a one off!"

I think you are twisting that to be the worst possible interpretation. I take it to mean the person is saying they are happy, provided the other person is right, to consider straight, gay, male female, "cis" (for sake of definition) and trans partners.

Unlike me. I am only willing to consider natal men who present as men. I would never be interested in a trans man, no matter how well they passed, or a trans woman or a woman. Do I have "internalised homophobia"?

Does their new leader have to be an MP? If so not much choice.

Saying you're pansexual as it's "about the person, not the gender", just screams (internalised) homophobia to me. "I'm still straight, honest, this is just a one off!"

It seems less open to same-sex relationships than "bisexual".

I wonder if they're going to get that "independent" investigation company (Veritas?) back in, for another whitewash they can sweep under the carpet.

That was the Greens, wasn't it? I don't think the Lib Dems have bothered with any of that.

Certainly sounds like Moran would be an extremely poor choice of leader. Given what a mess the LDs are in, maybe they should choose her anyway.

If she’d said bisexual would that be ok?

It would be accurate.

But she can't say that because she loves the queer theory, which denies actual sexuality (only three options available) and so went for the pansexual label. People - for example, me - who think queer theory is, at best, a load of old pomo-addled, bourgeois bullshit are going to take the piss out of her for the word choice. It's hardly the end of the world.

But she hasn't "come out" as pansexual. She's thrown a dead cat on the table because she's in with a chance of Lib Dem leader but her choice of partner might fuck that up due to alleged political shenanigans. Layla wants you to talk about Layla's self-ID sexuality label, not what her partner is alleged to have got up to.

There seems to be a reasonable amount of pushback on pan from the TRA side too. They (pans) self describe as explicitly inclusive of trans people, implying that (a) bis are not, and (b) trans people are neither their birth sex nor their acquired gender, and could only be attractive to people with a specific trans-inclusive orientation. Biphobic and transphobic.

I know HQ have asked us not to poke fun (and tbh the cookware jokes are old) but I think critiques of pansexuality as a belief system are legitimate under the site rules. By its own definition it’s not a sexual orientation as it has nothing to do with sex.

I mean, it’s not erasing lesbians, or homophobic, to not call yourself a lesbian when you actually go for both sexes

It really isn't. The twitter thread pointing out how ridiculous criticising her for being pansexual is justified.