#plyphobia

Bi/Bi+ is not a good umbrella term whatsoever.

Identities like pan, ply, and omni deserve individual recognition, not to be lumped under another identity that may have overlap with them but is not them. Mspec (multisexual/multiromantic spectrum) is right there, makes much more sense, and doesn't erase anyone's identity.

For years, non-bi mspecs were told, and are STILL told, that they're just "spicy bi" or "bi and trying to be special" or whatever other invalidating phrases. For years, these identities were shit on and told that they're all just "basically bi," that terms like pan/ply/omni aren't real or valid. For years, people were told they can't or shouldn't call themselves those terms and should just accept that they're actually bi, not "whatever they claim to be." For years, non-bi mspecs got told they were biphobic for using these labels and got called pseudo-derogatory terms (like "pannies" for pan people) for using them.

I do not think pan is a subset of bi. In fact, I'm beyond tired of hearing that about any mspec orientation that isn't bi; it honestly sounds like another way to say "bi and pan are the same," "pan is just spicy bi," etc.

Pan, as well as ply and omni, are their OWN orientations. I mean, why would we even argue over the differences if we're just gonna lump them all under bi anyways? There's a distinction between the 4 of them, and that distinction is incredibly important to a lot of mspecs.

I do not think pan is a microlabel either. Again, it's its own, completely separate orientation. Plus, I've seen exclusionists say the exact same thing to ace and aro folx. And recycling exclusionist rhetoric is... well, not great.

Now, I wanna say that if someone PERSONALLY wants to identify under bi and call their pan identity a microlabel, that's fine; do you. But please don't say that for all pan people because, from what I've heard and read, most of do not feel that way.