I have always had a hard time putting my romantic orientation into words. It doesn’t fit the typical words used to describe. “Pan” doesn’t feel right, I guess “poly” includes it, but dunno. I’m pretty much not attracted to men at all- trans or cis. Cis singlets in general I’m pretty edgy around because trans stuff is so invisible.
But there is one thing that all the people I’ve liked romantically have in common- they’re all members of multiple systems.
Now, of course, I don’t like [i]every[/i] member of [i]every[/i] multiple system. Not even on a friend level. Generally there’s only one person I romantically like in a system (if I like anyone in it), and there’ve been plenty of systems where I haven’t liked anyone (in any sense of the word). I also don’t know if/how physical stuff would come into play as I’ve mostly only known people online. But they do have that in common, although it wouldn’t surprise me if that’s not ALL they have in common.
And there are plenty of reasons that I could think of logically, like how they tend to be more accepting, but they apply to some singlets as well and doesn’t apply to plenty of people in multiple systems. Now, yeah, there isn’t really a word for that- although I suppose I could say I’m “mutli-romantic” (which, of course, soundsa bout the same as “polyromantic” if you don’t know what I mean, although that CAN be a perk). It feels odd defining this by gender because I think I’ve crushed on people of about every gender and assigned sex, but “pan” isn’t right because it doesn’t actually describe who I’m attracted to. It feels weird that attraction is always described by gender. There are so many other things to be attracted to.
Agreed- There are more demensions to attraction than just gender.
Definitely. Gender isn’t the most important thing to me, sometimes it doesn’t even register. But saying “pan” is inaccurate and really, to me, problematic.
Good ol’ “Queer”? I know that all saying we’re queer could cover up some potentially important differences but.. it’s the only word I know for “I love who I love , the way I love them and for the reasons I love them”.
It sometimes bothers me that of my three partners only one is cis, only one has not been diagnosed with autism and only one has always (to her knowledge) been singlet. But.. if it’s okay that my partners are white like I am, that my partners are British like I am, queer, members of the same clubs as I am, the same class, with the same level of education etc etc etc then it must be okay that they are like me in these ways.
We have stuff in common. People form relationships with people they have stuff in common with. It makes sense. All of my partners have a level of understanding of what it means to be trans, what it means to be autistic and what it means to be a member of a multiple system and I need them to have that level of understanding. This level of understanding is by no means guaranteed in a person who shares a characteristic but it’s more likely. I think it’s depth of interpersonal understanding I’m attracted to rather than any particular trait.
I hope that made some sense and/or was somehow helpful.
“Queer” still feels wrong to me for some reason. I don’t really know why… genderqueer, queer in general, all of it feels wrong for me. I don’t really know why. I’m not overly bothered about language, I’m more bothered about hte way we frame attraction and make it seem like gender is the be-all end-all of it.
And it did make sense.
It’s cool that you’ve found that many people who have enough understanding about those parts of your life. That probably is it for me as well- understanding. I just find it more often from people in multiple systems.