User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-44988386-20200416234118/@comment-25117610-20200417002801

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-44988386-20200416234118/@comment-25117610-20200417002801 Specially because sexuality has sometimes been written very differently in the DWU when compared to the real world (and even in the real world, it's quite hard to apply a nice little label to others), it not simple or right to say that, for example, River Song is bisexual, because she can be pansexual, or yet another term that's purely in-universe. But we know for sure that she's not heterosexual, so would clearly apply to her, even if  or  don't.

I'm of the opinion that, unless we get a direct quote of character X identifying character Y as (or, better yet, when we can, narration or character Y outright saying they're) "gay", "bisexual", "lesbian" or any other labels, that they're simply put under a category like (which would then house all the other, more specific categories).

A similar treatment could and should, of course, apply to gender identities (with the base category being something like, which would then "house"  ,  , and others that could apply) - disclaimer: I'm not the most qualified person to decide on this terminology, and categorisation, being cisgender, so if there is a better alternative, please do let me (us) know.