Alex Berg - Bisexual Culture Is No 'Fiction'

From Huffington Post, this article and podcast examines the basis of the recent New York Times Magazine article,  The Scientific Quest to Prove Bisexuality Exists, by Benoit Denizet-Lewis.

I used to identify as bisexual, but not any more. It's another way to limit sexuality to a binary perspective. The new terms being used among those whose sexuality is more fluid than what a binary view allows, are pansexuality, or omnisexuality.

For now, at least, accepting bisexuality as a legitimate experience is a step in the correct direction.

Bisexual Culture Is No 'Fiction'

Alex Berg
Posted: 03/29/2014

In 'The Scientific Quest to Prove Bisexuality Exists,' the New York Times profiled scientific studies working to prove, once and for all, that bisexuality has a factual basis. Do bisexuals still need science to prove their sexuality is real?

Hosted by: Alex Berg

Guests:

• Anna Pulley @annapulley (Oakland, CA) Bisexual Writer and Editor
• Ellyn Ruthstrom @BRC_Central (Boston, MA) President of the Bisexual Resource Center
• Dr. Herukhuti @DrHerukhuti (Brooklyn , NY) Clinical Sociologist; Founder, Center for Culture, Sexuality and Spirituality

Bisexuals are "slutty." They're "men in denial about their homosexuality." Most of us are closet cases. We're "not a legitimate sexual orientation," in the eyes of 15 percent of heterosexual people. We're undermined by the "mysterious" female sexuality. We're "something you simply do," devoid of any parallel to gay culture. Sometimes, we're even "en vogue" because, you know, bisexuality is "the new black."

At least this is what the mainstream media would have you believe about us.

Last week, the New York Times Magazine featured a story by Benoit Denizet-Lewis called 'The Scientific Quest to Prove Bisexuality Exists.' The story profiled the research of the American Institute of Bisexuality, which is responsible for funding much of the scientific research around our orientation. Though the piece didn't overtly question the very existence of bisexuality itself (the New York Times already did that in 2005), it focused largely on experiments that measure pupil dilation and genital arousal in search of concrete evidence of male bisexuality. Coupled with personal stories from mostly white, bisexual cis gender people (people whose gender identity matches the sex they were assigned at birth), the research presented by Denizet-Lewis served as a reminder of the ease in which bisexual lived experiences are reduced to the offensive -- and untrue -- platitudes listed above.

Yet, while The New York Times story was imperfect for its failure to present diverse bisexual identities, a response to the piece on Slate titled 'Is Bisexual Identity a Useful Fiction?' posited whether bisexuality is more than "something you simply do" in part because "it's nearly impossible to imagine a developed bisexual culture at this point in time," according to writer Mark Joseph Stern. Stern, for his part, ultimately affirms the existence of bisexuality in men and women, but condemns the modern bisexual movement for failing culturally "...to articulate a coherent platform beyond its initial goals of recognition."

Even if these writers concede -- with hesitation of course -- that us bisexuals exist, now we do so without a cultural identity?

This might as well be the same as questioning our very existence -- it certainly translates into real life experiences that do. At it's best, it's when I'm viewed as little more than sexual meat by couples propositioning me on OkCupid, or when I'm accused of being too afraid to come out as gay. At its worst, it's precious media space devoted to how I'm perceived as "dirty," instead of exploring why 45 percent of bisexual women have contemplated or attempted suicide, why we're twice as likely to have an eating disorder compared to our lesbian counterparts and why, compared with straight women and lesbians, we have the highest rates of alcohol abuse instead.

But, I don't have to look to Slate or any other online magazine to know that when I tell people I identify as bisexual, it holds less cultural currency than when I say I'm simply "queer." Given that the term has been recently reclaimed from its pejorative roots, the political undertones are more obvious. Remove the word "bisexual" from my vocabulary, and I'm instantly more accepted in the lesbian scene; considered more dateable, and trustworthy, even. So, when in October, bisexual writer and editor Anna Pulley gave some compelling reasons in Salon why we ought to consider putting "the word to bed," it was hard to look away.

After all, "bisexual" is marked by strong negative connotations that perhaps a new term would present a re-birth for those of us with fluid identities. "I think people's attitudes toward bisexuals comprise the bigger obstacle to acceptance....We're Girls Gone Wild or giving you HIV or closet-cases taking advantage of straight privilege or stealing your boyfriend. These are hard stereotypes to fight because they're so pervasive and culturally ingrained, even among bisexuals ourselves," Pulley wrote me in an email last year. Then, the term is criticized within the queer community for being too binary. Pulley wrote in an email that "If you're involved with a person who's genderqueer, trans, or intersex, for instance, "bisexual" doesn't really cut it."

Given that "bisexual" triggers the world's-worst-dirty sex taboo, I wonder: Has this connotation, perpetuated by places like the New York Times and Slate, become so unshakeable that it's time to replace the term?

Absolutely not.

Bisexuality should, for once and all, be publicly understood under activist Robyn Ochs' definition: "I call myself bisexual because I acknowledge that I have in myself the potential to be attracted -- romantically and/or sexually -- to people of more than one sex and/or gender, not necessarily at the same time, not necessarily in the same way, and not necessarily to the same degree." While this definition itself encompasses all the identities of the LGBTQ community, in Slate, Stern wonders if its one unto itself: "Is bisexuality even an identity, in the way that homosexuality is?"

My bisexual identity is one that is defined by proudly challenging assumptions about sexuality altogether. Outsiders frequently judge my sexuality based on the gender of the person I'm with; in coming out to them as bisexual, through my capacity to love, I immediately challenge their notion of what makes a person LGBT. Faith Cheltenham, president of BiNet USA, put it this way in a phone call this week, "People think one thing about bi people and the reality is different. That's what we talk about when we use bi-culture, how people see us being different than who we are." Equally as profound is the word's rich cultural and political legacy. Just look to last year's bisexual White House summit, which helped inspire Bisexual Health Awareness Month, and the many publications, musicians, manifestos and organizations dedicated to documenting the experiences of bisexual people. If these don't constitute a "coherent platform," what does?

Perhaps most proudly, bisexual culture represents intersectionality at its core. We are cis gender and trans people alike, among all of the other identities we intersect as 50 percent of the LGBT community. Cheltenham wrote me in an email last year that for her, "Bisexuality is not who I am, it is a component of my identity. As a black woman I have other aspects of my identity that will consistently affect my life. As a black American I am more likely to have poor health outcomes. As a woman I am more likely to be affected by sexism." So, when Stern insisted in Slate that it's time for the bisexual "movement to stop substantiating its own existence and start trying to give that existence the cultural substance it craves," it made me wish I could. In fact, I'd be more than happy to stop -- as soon as the media stops looking to scientific studies to prove we exist.

Correction: An earlier version of this blog stated that no people of color were interviewed for the New York Times piece. One person of color was quoted in the piece and and several were featured in the slideshow that accompanied the piece.

Follow Alex Berg on Twitter: www.twitter.com/AlexfromPhilly

Is Male Bisexual Arousal a Matter of Curiosity?

I find these studies a bit condescending - even when coming from the British Psychological Society Research Digest. Perhaps I feel that way because I do not believe that most men can be placed cleanly into a hetero, bi, or gay box. Sexual preference for many people falls on a spectrum, and some of us are not attracted to gender as much as we are attracted to people.

Studies such as this one cannot or do not account for criteria outside of sexual arousal. That is a very limited lens through which to view men's choices in relationships.

Some bisexual men are aroused by women, some aren't - is curiosity the reason?

Jan. 3, 2014


When a man describes himself as bisexual, we usually take this to mean that he has sexual relations with both men and women, and/or that he is attracted to both sexes. However, prior lab research has found that many men who self-identify as bi-sexual are not in fact sexually aroused - in a physical sense - by the opposite sex.

It's important to remember that physical sexual arousal is only one reflection of a person's sexual desires and identity, not the be all and end all. However, this past research suggests that, from a bio-psychological perspective, the label bisexual is used by a diverse group of men. A new study builds on this idea, and finds that a key distinguishing characteristic among bisexual men is their level of sexual curiosity.

Gerulf Rieger and his colleagues conducted two studies with hundreds of men, some of whom were recruited via university adverts, others via websites where men seek sexual partners. The first study used pupil dilation as an index of sexual arousal. The second study used increase in penile circumference as the measure of sexual arousal.

The men, who rated themselves on a sexual orientation sliding scale from strictly homosexual, to bisexual, to strictly heterosexual, watched video clips of attractive male or female models masturbating in the first study, or, in the second study, short videos of two men having sex, or two women having sex. In both studies, the participants also filled out a 10-item questionnaire about their sexual curiosity. Example items included "If I were invited to watch a porn movie, I would accept" and "Sex without love is appealing to me."

On average, men who self-identified as bisexual showed the sexual arousal patterns you might expect, being less aroused than heterosexual men (but more aroused than homosexual men) by videos featuring women, and more aroused than heterosexual men by videos featuring men. This average data conceals the fact that some bisexual men were aroused by both sexes, while others were aroused only by men. The novel finding from this research is that these arousal patterns were correlated with sexual curiosity. Bisexual men on average reported more sexual curiosity than straight or gay men; moreover, among bisexual men only, greater sexual curiosity was linked with more arousal in response to videos featuring women. Bisexual men with low levels of sexual curiosity tended to be aroused only by other men.

Rieger and his colleagues speculate that shared genetic influences likely account for increased sexual curiosity and bisexual physiological arousal, thus explaining why these two characteristics correlate. They also propose that some bisexual men with elevated curiosity may "reattribute" their curiosity-related arousal to sexual stimuli depicting either sex, "thus increasing their sexual arousal and rewarding experiences associated with both men and women." What about the bisexual men who are only aroused by men? Rieger's team suggest that their identity may be in a transitional stage - perhaps they self-identify as bisexual on the basis of past experiences and relationships, or to conform to societal norms.

"The present findings are in line with the notion that a male bisexual identity can be found in a diverse range of men who differ in sexual attitudes and feelings," the researchers said.

_________________________________

Rieger G, Rosenthal AM, Cash BM, Linsenmeier JA, Bailey JM, and Savin-Williams RC (2013). Male bisexual arousal: A matter of curiosity? Biological psychology, 94 (3), 479-89 PMID: 24055219

Brian Mustanski, Ph.D. - What Is Sexual Orientation (and Bisexuality and Sexual Fluidity)?

This comes from Brian Mustanski, Ph.D., at The Sexual Continuum on the Psychology Today blog site. He asked Meredith Chivers, Assistant Professor at Queen’s University in Ontario, Canada. She runs the Sexuality and Gender Laboratory (SageLab), and is "dedicated to understanding gender differences and similarities in sexuality, including sexual psychophysiology, sexual orientation, and sexual functioning."

In addition to the video embedded in the post, I have added a couple of additional videos from her on the topics of sexual fluidity and bisexuality.

What is sexual orientation?

by Brian Mustanski, Ph.D. in The Sexual Continuum
Published on March 30, 2013

We asked Dr. Meredith Chivers, "What is sexual orientation?"

It may seem obvious what it means to be gay (attracted to the same sex) or heterosexual (attracted to the opposite sex), but what does sexual orientation mean?

We asked that question to Dr. Meredith Chivers at a Special IMPACT interview series at a SpeakOUT event at Center on Halsted, Chicago, IL.

Dr. Meredith Chivers says that everybody has a sexual orientation and sexual drive that we don’t consciously think about. Who we are attracted to is an automatic process.

Dr. Chivers has appeared on numerous TV shows, published extensively on topics of sexuality, and even shared sex column advice for Savage Love. She is an Assistant Professor at Queen’s University in Ontario, Canada. Her Sexuality and Gender Laboratory, SageLab, is dedicated to understanding gender differences and similarities in sexuality, including sexual psychophysiology, sexual orientation, and sexual functioning. Here's what she had to say:

(Note if the video below doesn't load you can view it here: http://www.impactprogram.org/youth/dr-meredith-chivers-what-is-sexual-orientation/).

~ Dr. Mustanski is the Director of the IMPACT LGBT Health and Development Program at Northwestern University. You can follow the Sexual Continuum blog by becoming a fan on Facebook. He periodically live tweets from research conferences on sexuality and you can follow him @sexualcontinuum.

* * * * *

Bonus videos:

What Is Sexual Fluidity?



What Is Bisexuality?

Bisexual Men On the 'Down Low' Run Risk for Poor Mental Health

This makes sense, from my own experience. Bi-men might receive acceptance from family and friends when "coming out," but in other situations (often with female partners) being honest can result in getting rejected, which no doubt negatively impacts mental health.

More importantly, however, the study shows that bisexual men who are concerned about concealing their same-sex behavior also experience lower levels of social support and more internalized homophobia - negative attitudes toward their own same-sex behavior.

Bisexual Men On the 'Down Low' Run Risk for Poor Mental Health

Jan. 2, 2013 — Bisexual men are less likely to disclose and more likely to conceal their sexual orientation than gay men. In the first study to look at the mental health of this population, researchers at Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health found that greater concealment of homosexual behavior was associated with more symptoms of depression and anxiety.

The study published in the American Psychological Association's Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, examined bisexual men "on the down low," a subgroup of bisexual men who live predominantly heterosexual lives and do not disclose their same-sex behavior, a group that has not been studied to date. The researchers studied 203 nongay-identified men in New York City, who self-reported being behaviorally bisexual and had not disclosed their same-sex behavior to their female partners.

According to findings, men who live with a wife or girlfriend, who think of themselves as heterosexual, and who have a lower frequency of sex with men were more likely to conceal their same-sex behavior. Greater frequency of sex with women also correlated with greater concealment. Men with a household income of $30,000 or more per year reported greater concealment about their same-sex behavior than men with lower incomes.

"Our research provides information on the factors that might contribute to greater concealment among this group of behaviorally bisexual men," said Eric Schrimshaw, PhD, assistant professor of Sociomedical Sciences and lead author. "Such information is critical to understanding which of these bisexual men may be at greatest risk for mental health problems."

Nearly 38% of the men reported that they have not shared with anyone that they have sex with men. Only 41% reported that they had confided in a best friend or parent.

Dr. Schrimshaw and colleagues found that greater concealment correlated with more symptoms of depression and anxiety and lower positive emotions. However, disclosure to a few close friends or family did not seem to help; disclosure to confidants was not associated with good mental health.

"The fact that concealment, but not disclosure, was associated with the mental health of these bisexual men is critically important for the way therapeutic interventions are conducted in this population," said Karolynn Siegel, PhD, professor of Sociomedical Sciences and co-author. "Although disclosure may result in acceptance from family and friends, in other cases -- particularly with female partners -- disclosure may also result in rejecting reactions, which are adversely associated with mental health."

The research also suggests reasons why concealment was negatively associated with mental health. Bisexual men who were more concerned than others about concealing their same-sex behavior also tended to report lower levels of social support and more internalized homophobia -- that is, negative attitudes toward their same-sex behavior.

The findings indicate that publically disclosing their same-sex behavior may not be necessary to their mental health, as long as bisexual men have adequate emotional support to cope with other stressors in their lives. Professionals who do therapeutic work with bisexual men may wish to focus instead on helping such men reduce their perceived need to conceal their same-sex behavior and accept their sexual orientation.

Citation:
Eric W. Schrimshaw, Karolynn Siegel, Martin J. Downing, Jeffrey T. Parsons. Disclosure and Concealment of Sexual Orientation and the Mental Health of Non-Gay-Identified, Behaviorally Bisexual Men. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 2012; DOI:10.1037/a0031272

Layers of Sexual Identity - A Meditation

[The picture is of the gender-pop band, Girlyman.]

For many years there has been an interesting phenomenon in my life wherein my "straight" identified friends believe without hesitation that I am, like them, a straight male, and likewise, my gay friends believe that I am a gay man who simply has not decided yet to fully embrace my true nature. I've always found this amusing.

Generally, I do not much think about it until someone asks me if I am straight or gay. Someone asked me that the other day, someone who does not yet know me very well, and I actually had to think about the answer. Often, if asked if I am gay or straight, I answer, "Yes." This time, however, I answered, "No."

For most of the rest of the day, I thought about the various layers of sexual identity in my life. It seems that interpersonal context, social environment, and a host of other factors all play a role in how I perceive my sexual identity and how others perceive it. The reality is that the two seldom are in sync, except among close friends. What follows are a few reasons why that may be so.

(1) Culturally Straight: As far as the mainstream culture is concerned, I am a straight white male who loves sports, who is in a committed relationship with a woman, and who has none of the style skills often associated with gay men (I like athletic shorts or cargo shorts and a plain solid color tee-shirt, and getting me to dress up is on par with getting the GOP to increase taxes on the wealthy). I like to lift heavy weights, break stuff up with a sledge hammer, and watch Sons of Anarchy and Breaking Bad. Sounds pretty straight.

(2) Culturally Gay: Maybe this is less true now that metrosexuality has been invented, but there was a time when a male who keeps his hair pretty short, stays very physically fit, uses hair care products, uses moisturizer, and prefers to smell like something other than body odor was, by default, gay. Then there is the enjoyment of museums, cooking, poetry, and art films - none of which says straight American male. Oh yeah, AND I am a psychotherapist - a field that is 80% women and involves talking about feelings and holding space for people who are often in severe emotional pain. Sounds pretty gay (and not "gay" in the way kids use the word today).

(3) Not Bisexual: I used to identify as bisexual when I first accepted that I am attracted to men as well as to women. Over the years, however, that label has been inaccurate in a couple of ways.

(A) It feels limiting and it accepts that there are only two sexualities, gay or straight. I reject the notion of binaries in the realm of gender and sexuality (and other areas as well). It's not an either/or choice and it should never be presented as though it is. Sexuality is fluid, as is gender identity (if we allow it to be).

(B) Most of my significant relationships (with a couple of exceptions) have been with women. For a variety of reasons, I find, in general, that I am more compatible with women, probably because I am comfortable with emotions while men (even gay men) often struggle in this realm. I also tend find many more women to be attractive than I do men.

For other men, coming to the point of being able to affirm their bisexuality is a monumental moment in their lives - see this Single Dad Laughing blog post for how difficult this can be. In whatever form people "come out," and in whatever label they choose in the process, revealing a whole other part of ourselves to others is often frightening. When that part of us is still subject to shaming and inequality before the law, it is that much more challenging. Deep bow of respect to Single Dad (Dan) for the courage it took to make his coming out part of his blog.

(4) Gender Fluid: I am clearly and unambiguously a man, biologically. However, I manifest feminine energy as much as masculine energy in my daily life, both of which are context specific. I also experience myself as more gender fluid in my interpersonal relationships, as well as at work (when I am at my psychotherapy job, I sometimes forget I am male unless it becomes part of the conversation [which it does from time to time]).

I am beginning to believe that the masculine/feminine binary is more damaging than helpful. These are poor descriptors of behaviors or traits (all of the psychological or emotional traits assigned to either M or F are essentially human qualities that are available to both sexes).

[By the way: sex is the biological makeup of an individual's reproductive anatomy; gender is an individual's lifestyle, often culturally learned - just so we are clear.]

So What's My Point?

I'm not sure that I have one - but I do think that it's useful to cogitate or meditate on these ideas from time to time. It's also useful to see ourselves and our various identities as objects of awareness rather than being so embedded in them that we are unaware.

My guess is that more and more people have experiences similar to my own these days. Although the mainstream culture is only now warming up to the idea that lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and the transgendered (LGBT) are all real people who deserve equal rights, there are a lot of people on the leading edge of cultural transformation who are beginning to grasp the fluidity of gender and even of sexual identity.

[Another by the way: transgender is not simply transsexual, it's a much broader tent that includes anyone who feels left out by the traditional gender binary (including intersex, the third recognized sex type beside male and female): "The category transgender has no singular, fixed meaning. Rather, it is inclusive of identities and experiences of sex and gender variance, changing, and blending. Although no consensus exists about exactly whom this category includes, nearly all definitions share the use of a metaphorical umbrella, which activists agree is a useful tool for political organizing outside current understandings of binary sex and gender divisions."]

 All of this makes me wonder . . .

I do not believe in the soul or any on-going personal essence that survives death (although I will not go as far as to say there is no such thing - I'm agnostic, so sue me), but I tend to think we all have some form of intangible awareness that is available to us if we seek ways to experience it. Maybe it is a soul, or buddhanature, or higher self, or Atman, or Christ Consciousness - different worldviews have different names for it - but my sense is that it is not gendered.

Okay, this is sounding like dualism, and I reject dualism (I once proposed Singularism back in grad school in the 1990s, before I knew anything about the Singularity hype proposed by Ray Kurzweil and others). So please allow me to clarify: I think we are evolving toward a time when our bodies will be male, female, or intersex, but our identities will not be defined exclusively by our biology (which is largely the case these days for a majority of people). Identity (awareness?) will be influenced or even shaped by our biology, but it will not be defined by it. We will become gender fluid, and with that, sexual identity will be seen as a continuum, not a binary.

I hope . . . . 

Bi-Sexual Men DO Exist - What a Relief . . . .

In the recent issue of Biological Psychology, researchers discovered that there are men who are sexually aroused by both men and women, contrary to an earlier study (2005) that suggested there was no such creature. When I read that early study I was alarmed - it implied that I do not exist, or that my experience is somehow not real.

The new study, as you will read below, was a lot more intellectually honest in how it recruited subjects than the original study.

Here is a little bit of the New York Times article:

No Surprise for Bisexual Men: Report Indicates They Exist


By DAVID TULLER
Published: August 22, 2011


In an unusual scientific about-face, researchers at Northwestern University have found evidence that at least some men who identify themselves as bisexual are, in fact, sexually aroused by both women and men.


The finding is not likely to surprise bisexuals, who have long asserted that attraction often is not limited to one sex. But for many years the question of bisexuality has bedeviled scientists. A widely publicized study published in 2005, also by researchers at Northwestern, reported that “with respect to sexual arousal and attraction, it remains to be shown that male bisexuality exists.”


That conclusion outraged bisexual men and women, who said it appeared to support a stereotype of bisexual men as closeted homosexuals.


In the new study, published online in the journal Biological Psychology, the researchers relied on more stringent criteria for selecting participants. To improve their chances of finding men aroused by women as well as men, the researchers recruited subjects from online venues specifically catering to bisexuals.


They also required participants to have had sexual experiences with at least two people of each sex and a romantic relationship of at least three months with at least one person of each sex.


 Men in the 2005 study, on the other hand, were recruited through advertisements in gay-oriented and alternative publications and were identified as heterosexual, bisexual or homosexual based on responses to a standard questionnaire.

Read the whole article.

Salon then ran it's own story on this topic. They looked more closely at the cultural binary, gay or straight. Bi men do not fit into this little box (nor do bi women for that matter, but everyone seems to be okay with that, especially straight men). Because of this limited perspective, bi men become invisible.

In my own experience, gay men tend to think bi men are not fully out or are straight guys exploring a fetish. Likewise, straight men tend to pretend we are normal heterosexual men, possibly as a defense against having to deal with the ambiguity of bisexuality and what it might mean about them (just a guess).

The invisible bisexual man

Science has proven that they do exist, but bi guys say we're a long way from seeing sexuality in shades of gray


By Tracy Clark-Flory 

The big sex news of the week was that bisexual men exist.


OK, so a new study proving that bisexual men are aroused by both men and women didn't come as "news" to bi men, but most are nonetheless relieved by the results, because it will help to legitimize their identity in others' eyes. (This is especially true since prior research controversially reported that there was no evidence of male bisexuality.) Still, the more than dozen bisexual men that I interviewed about the study say it serves as a reminder of just how far they still have to go toward acceptance and understanding. Despite enormous strides made in the past decade for LGBT rights, male bisexuality remains a challenging idea and a unique taboo, even within sexually progressive circles.


A large part of that is because, culturally, we tend to think in terms of black-and-white, not shades of gray -- and that's especially true when it comes to the subject of sex. Rarely does a bisexual come out without fielding questions about which sex they like more -- the assumption being that they must lean one way or the other. It's true that many do: As Ryan from Vancouver wrote in an email, he puts an "emphasis on the 'preference' in 'sexual preference.'" He might be attracted to women more often than men, but believes he "could be attracted to pretty much anybody in the right circumstances, sexuality be damned." But there are also many bi men who describe their sexual attraction in much more fluid terms. The 27-year-old says: "To me, I look for and fall in love with the personality and the intelligence, and then the overall style of the person, never giving any thought to if they are 'male or female.'"


Romantic as it may be, that is a concept not so easily grasped by the general public -- which can make bisexual men feel invisible. Simon, a 26-year-old living in Brooklyn, N.Y., tells me, "Whenever, say, some prominent heterosexually married male public figure has a same-sex affair, literally everyone rolls their eyes at the 'closeted homosexual,'" he says. "I'm not sure I remember ever hearing someone seriously entertain the possibility that the philanderer was bisexual." Bisexuals are more visible than ever, but our cultural default, the shortcut we take to understand a person, is still: gay or straight?

Read the whole article.

If you would like to read this new study, it's been made available online in Google Docs by the good folks at The Stranger in Seattle.

Citation:
Rosenthal, AM, Sylva, D. Safron, A, & Bailey, JM. (2011). Sexual arousal patterns of bisexual men revisited. Biological Psychology, doi:10.1016/j.biopsycho.2011.06.015
 

Perspectives on Male Sexuality

These two posts have been hanging around in my tabs for a while, but I found them interesting and wanted to share them - I'd be curious to hear what any of you think about these. One post (the first one) features men talking about male sexuality, the second one is a female perspective on male sexuality.

This first one was posted a month ago at the Good Men Project site by Rachel Rabbit White - then there is a follow-up from her own website. This is part of her "The Man Project," an effort to explore male experience.

As an aside, this post was part of the Sex Week series at the GMP, I'll link to the other articles below this post.

What’s Missing From the Discussion About Male Sexuality?

May 31, 2011 By Rachel Rabbit White

Rachel Rabbit White started The Man Project to hear about the aspects of male sexuality that don’t get discussed.

Never ask a guy to braid your hair. A study just came out that suggests men feel angry when made to perform a “traditional feminine task” like, apparently, hair braiding. The researcher suggests this is because men are expected to gender perform in ways that women don’t have an equivalent; they must constantly “prove” their masculinity. While it’s not easy equating the ways that sexism effects men and women, rigid gender roles don’t help anyone.

But I am writing about this male phenomenon as a woman. And most of my sex positive blogging peers are also female. It almost seems there is some silent rule: men aren’t allowed to write about sexuality, as though a guy with a sex blog is the intellectual version of a flasher. It’s another way sexism harms men.

In these sex positive discussions, there is so much I want to hear from the male side, so much about masculinity that needs exploring. And this is how The Man Project was born. I asked men who are vocal about sex and asked them what was missing from the discussion about male sexuality. After talking with a handful of men from varying backgrounds—literature, art, porn, television—here’s a sampling of what I found. Feel free to weigh in and continue the discussion in the comments section below.

♦◊♦

How do you feel about your masculinity? Is this important to you?

David J: I think there’s an interesting cultural struggle around masculinity going on. At least judging by the advertising that’s targeting my demographic, like the Old Spice commercials. There’s this sense that masculinity, as it’s traditionally articulated, is problematic. So, masculinity isn’t something we seriously address. Also, it’s not something that’s presented to us in a serious way, it’s presented to us comically.

So, my friends and I, when we act traditionally masculine, we are both performing and making fun of masculinity–but we aren’t examining it. And we end up expressing our gender that way. It’s not, “I’ve thought a lot of masculinity and other forms of gender expression.” Instead, it’s, “The way I relate to my masculinity is by making fun of masculinity. And other than that, I don’t really know how to deal with it.”

Michael: The one thing that absolutely bugs me in the gay world is the question of, “Are you a top or a bottom?” It’s really, “How masculine are you?” If you want to see how masculinity and femininity are played out in the straight world, you only have to see how it is played out in the gay world. Top and bottom is really nothing but masculine and feminine. In ancient Greece and in Rome, homosexuality was accepted—but only if you were the top. The proscription against homosexuality was not about men having sex with men. It was about men not acting like women.

♦◊♦

Why is the sex writing, sex positive sphere dominated by women?

Michael: When I was selected to be the co-host of Sex Inspectors, they didn’t come out and say, “We want someone who is gay,” but they did more or less. I think the idea was if a [straight] guy talks about sex to a woman, there’s a sense that there is a hidden agenda. Which is a nice way of saying, “He is predator-like.”

Grant: We think there’s something gross about reading about a straight guy and his sexual experiences. Women are given great sexual latitude to do a number of different things—bondage, kinks, even lots of different vanilla sex. Men are really sort of reduced to just wanting to fuck something, and that’s it. Sexually, we are forced into a box and not allowed to express ourselves in many more ways than society allows.

David S: I think the critique and developing analysis of women’s sexuality came out of the feminist movement to a large extent. So, that would explain the critique of traditional thinking about women’s sexuality in general. It’s too bad because I think traditional gender roles in sexuality are just as limiting and damaging for men.

♦◊♦

There is this idea that male sexuality is different, simpler than female sexuality. It’s just a button to push. Thoughts?

David S: I used to run a workshop on male sexuality for women. One of the most common things that women would ask is, “So I’m with this guy, we have amazing sex and then in the morning, he is like gone.” I think guys think they are just gonna have a fun time. Because sex is as powerful as it is, sometimes a big door opens up inside you. Suddenly, your emotional guts are all over the table. Sex, touch, it is powerful in that way. Suddenly, you are dealing with the fact that you never got touched as a child, suddenly you are dealing with the time something happened and you were embarrassed. Suddenly, all sorts of larger issues, even existential ones leap up, and there you are in the middle of them.

I think women are more prepared for this, less frightened. For some guys, in this deeply intimate exposed place with a person they hardly know, they wake up in the morning and start putting a wall up, really fast. One of the sad things about sex, particularly for men, is that the culture shoves a version of sex down your throat that is just a poor, pale version of what is really possible.

Buck: I think and act and interact totally different from how I did when I was female and had little testosterone in my body. Even though I was a very masculine female. But I was much more sensitive, I cried easier. I looked at things differently, my sexuality. My sex drive was intense for a woman. But I would say it is much more intense now.

♦◊♦

What about male stereotypes like guys being “less in touch with their emotions”?

Eon: In a breakup, for example, I think women have a lot more coping mechanisms that society supports. Men are expected to not care and move on. I don’t know what’s going on at the Moose Lodge and I’m sure that some of those brothers are helping each other out. But in general, it’s hard to help another man emotionally. It’s a pride thing and a societal pressure not to.

Danny: There has been so much discussion over how women are treated, or how women feel when they perform in pornographic scenes. But heterosexual men seem to have been left out of this discussion. Maybe even gay men too. “How do male performers feel about performing in sex scenes?” It’s not a question often asked. I think it’s just assumed we want to fuck anything that’s put in front of us. I assure you that’s not the case.

♦◊♦

What about the one, guys are just “thinking with their dicks”?

Zak: So, guys can be extraordinarily smart in order to get their dick to have what they want. Like, right now we’re talking on a telephone. You’ve got Skype. My guess is that both of those things were invented by guys who thought that if they could invent something cool, it would make them rich and famous and get them laid. So Alexander Graham Bell wasn’t maybe thinking with his dick but thinking really helped his dick out.
Women are a complicated target. You have to really do all kinds of crazy shit in order to impress them or to get them to know you. And so, you know, men invent computers and airplanes and socks and healthcare because, like, you can’t have sex with women when they’re dead! We’ve really got to keep them all alive.

Eon: In my youth, the idea was that no girl would want to look at a dick—the dick is just lucky to be here. But I think both men and women want to be ambitious and explore the world in a similar way. [What’s missing for men is] the inability to make the one partner both of these things, wife and sexual adventurer.

♦◊♦

What is missing from the discussion around male sexuality?

Grant: I want to suck a dick. I don’t want to conform to a lifestyle or necessarily move to Chelsea. I just want to suck a big one. If women [want to experiment], it’s cool, but for guys it’s, “Oh, so you’re gay?”

Also, here is what I want to see changed: the way men use language. They talk about banging girls, finger-banging or fucking. It’s something mechanical that sort of gets done. I hope for them it’s actually a little more complex than that, a little more considered. But anything other than some sort of Anglo-Saxon term for what you do to a woman as a man is viewed as somehow weird, or creepy, or it makes you a sensualist.

David J: The message we are getting today is that our sexuality is problematic and destructive. I think that culturally there aren’t enough symbols of non-destructive sexuality for men to really adopt.

♦◊♦

Rachel Rabbit White is a “sex journalist.” Follow her on Twitter for more conversations about masculinity, sexuality and sex positivity. And to see more from these interviews, visit her blog.

More from Sex Week at the Good Men Project:

Benoit Denizet-Lewis: The Dan Savage Interview

Amanda Marcotte: What Women Don’t Tell You

Ed Fell: 10 Secrets to Satisfying Sex

Andrew Ladd: A Billion Wicked Assumptions

Charles Allen: Why I Hate My Giant Dong

Emily Heist Moss: Does Size Matter?

John DeVore: Multiple Inches of Love

Joshua Matacotta: Do Gay Men Fear Intimacy?

Bhatia and MacKinnon: The Psychology of Erectile Dysfunction

Wilson & Robinson: Can’t She See I Need It?

Robert Levithan: Sex at 60

* * * * * * *

This is a follow-up post, of sorts, to the above article - it is a guest article by Elly of Quiet Riot Girl that was posted at Rachel Rabbit White's blog.

Metro or Bi? Digging Deeper into Modern Masculinity

3rd Jun. × ’11

By Rachel Rabbit White

This is a guest post by the cheeky, entertaining and always whip-smart Elly of Quiet Riot Girl. Photo by Mona Kuhn

“Contrary to what you have been told, metrosexuality is not about flip-flops and facials, ‘man-bags’ or ‘manscara’. Or about men becoming ‘girlie’ or ‘gay’” says Mark Simpson, the man who coined the word “metrosexual”. “It’s about men becoming everything. Quite simply, metrosexuality is men’s “desire to be desired”. Men in contemporary society are now able to admit to wanting to be beautiful and to be appreciated as “objects of desire” in a way that was previously reserved for women.”

One of the things I love about Rabbit’s blog is this is a place where men and expressions of masculinity are taken seriously. That sounds strange, when we are forever told (mainly by feminists) that it is women who are not considered adequately in our culture–as people, as sexual beings.

But I find that wherever I look there are discussions about ‘‘the objectification of women’s bodies” or “sexual violence against women and girls” or “pornography and women”. It has reached a point where I have to ask, without irony, “what about the men?” Simpson, an English author and journalist, has spent his entire career asking that very question.

Simpson coined “metrosexual” back in 1994, but it really became a media-fuelled phenomenon in 2003 when “metromania” hit the USA. From Barack Obama to David Beckham to Giorgio Armani to Eminem to The Situation, the metro man is everyman. As Simpson explains, “metrosexuality is the male desire to be desired by everyone, including and sometimes especially by other men. This was once regarded as pathological, perverted and definitely something to keep to yourself. Now it is so commonplace it’s almost ‘normal’. Perhaps even – eek! – ordinary.”

But, it’s not as though men just became narcissistic. Simpson says it’s clear that men had a capacity for sensuality and vanity – a desire to be desired – but for most of history it has been closeted. Men were to be warriors or laborers or empire builders. They weren’t meant to be beautiful. The Victorians codified a sexual division that decreed women were beauty and men were action. But now that men have been encouraged to get in touch with their vanity and sensuality it seems there’s no stopping it!

Metrosexuality differs from other incarnations of male self-love, in that it’s reliant on consumer capitalism. In other words, if you want to look hot: buy more stuff. But that narcissism, ever-apparent for the metro-man who needs mirrors like Narcissus needs the pool, is not necessarily a negative, argues Simpson.

“The rise of male behaviors, practices and tastes characterised as metrosexual are made possible in large part by the decline of stigma attached to male homosexuality. While this stigma made life difficult for homosexual men, it also had an instructive, not to say repressive, effect on all men.” In contrast metrosexuality means masculinity is no longer black and white, “no longer always heterosexual and never homosexual or always active never passive, always desiring never desired, always looking never looked at,” says Simpson.

Nicole Lesser, photo

Back in the 90s, Simpson identified “lesbian chic” — you know, those women celebrities snogging each other on magazine covers and at film premieres-as an example of increasing acceptability of female “bi-curiousness”. It is this blurring of sexual orientation amongst men that some people have found hardest to swallow. I asked Simpson if metrosexuality blurs the boundaries between gay and straight, and enables men to express bi-curiousness, why is it still not acceptable for men to be openly bi?

“It’s still early days, remember. And we’re only just beginning to move away from the commonly held nostrum of the last thirty years or so that all women are bi, but any man who touches another man’s ‘pee pee’ is gay” says Simpson. “ Metrosexuality is definitely a form of bi-responsiveness. But a lot of people want masculinity to remain repressed. Some men are scared stiff of having those options. They don’t trust themselves. This is crucial in understanding how metrosexuality has impacted men’s sense of self, and also why it is still a controversial concept, especially in conservative corners of the globe.”

In the end, it all comes down to one plain fact, Simpson explains, “Frankly, everyone knows that men love cock. Though we’re not meant to mention it. And as a result of this secretiveness there is an unconscious idea that if men taste cock then they won’t want pussy. It’s untrue of course, in most cases – Professor Bailey and his kinky sex-lie detector tests notwithstanding – men love cock AND pussy. Just look at straight porn! It’s salient that this fear doesn’t generally manifest itself with female bi-curiousness. Because, the assumption seems to be ‘she’s always gonna want cock’.”

But despite this homo-anxiety he triggers in many men, the metrosexual won’t stop shoving his pretty sexually-undefined ass in our faces. He symbolizes men gaining pleasure from looking at themselves and each other, you just can’t be 100% straight and metro. In the metrosexual noughties, some male stars have come out as bisexual. James Franco, Duncan James from the UK Boy-band Blue, and Tom Hardy for example. Simpson says about Hardy, “There is something quite inspiring about this married Hollywood star’s ownership of his bi-curious past and his ambi-sexual persona. It’s a good advert for metrosexiness: ‘Don’t be afraid to dream a little bigger, darling’.”

Some recent research backs up Simpson’s theories. A 2010 report by academics at The University of Bath suggests that “the majority of male students in the UK think nothing of giving one another a big wet one on each other’s lips in all sorts of social situations”. The researchers found that 89% of white undergraduate men at two UK universities and one sixth from college said they were happy to kiss another man on the lips through friendship. Doctor Eric Anderson, the lead researcher, claimed that heterosexual men kissing is a result of the decline of homophobia.

The young men interviewed came out with some lovely quotes which illustrate how comfortable they are with expressing their “metro-love” for one another. Matt, telling a story about breaking up with his girlfriend, “I was really lonely…So one night I asked my housemate who is one of my best friends if I could sleep in the bed with him. He looked at me, smiled, and said, ‘Come on,’ opening the covers to invite me in.” Matt continued, “He kissed me, and then held me. It was nice. I sent him a text the next day saying, ‘I’ve got the best friend in the world’.”

Sam, comparing university with more conservative approaches in his home town, “I never kiss any of my friends back home,” he said. “And I can’t imagine it going down too well.” When asked about how his friends showed him affection back home, he said, “Punching and rubbing their knuckles into my head.”

Pete stressing that when he kisses a mate, it is not because he is drunk: “Alcohol might make it easier for some guys, I guess. But I don’t think that’s why guys kiss.” He added, “I can tell you why I kiss my friends. I kiss them because I love them.”

“I kiss them because I love them” is a little bit different, a little deeper, than the stereotype of the metrosexual, preening and plucking and prancing in front of a mirror. The achievement of Metrosexy and its potentially subversive power lies in the way Simpson manages to take all these aspects of metrosexuality and make whole, a rounded picture of how contemporary masculinities are being formed and changed, made less heteronormative, through our consumer culture.

Quoting that early metro icon, James Dean, who famously denied being homosexual, Simpson characterizes metrosexuality as a man’s way of saying, “I don’t want to go through life with one hand tied behind my back.” And why should he?
Editors Note: “No-Homo”.

Tags: What’s Missing From the Discussion About Male Sexuality?, Rachel Rabbit White, The Good Men Project, men, masculinity, sexuality, sex roles, sex, women, metrosexuals, The Man Project, sexism, stereotypes, rigid gender roles, traditional masculinity, masculinities, gender identity, Mark Simpson, self love, bisexual

A Collection of Posts on Male Bisexuality

When I first began to question and try to understand my gender identity, bisexual didn't really seem like the right word, and it still doesn't. Back then, I used it anyway because having some kind of label was important to my 20-something self. To complicate matters, my sense of the issue had a lot to do with androgyny - I saw myself as androgynous and I was drawn to androgynous people romantically - not girlie-girls and not manly-men.

If I have to define my sexuality at all, and would rather not, I now prefer the prefixes omni- or pan-sexual - both terms essentially mean that gender is not an issue in choosing romantic partners. My feeling is that calling myself bisexual is to affirm the gender binary that I do believe to be useful anymore (at least for some of us).

I understand that my sense of this is different than many others - I'm probably just making this sh!t up on my own, which is cool.

There have been several articles of late (which means in the last month or so) that address male bisexuality in one way or another, so I thought I'd share them here. I suspect many men are not strictly heterosexual (maybe most men, since extremes seldom exist except in our imaginations). Nevertheless, I have no desire to force my views on someone else - but I would like to create more tolerance and understanding among the various sexuality "camps," and I use the word camps because sometimes it feels like war.

My gay friends used to tell me to quit messing around and get fully out of the closet. My straight friends figured I was already "weird," so what's one more thing. My family never spoke of it again after I told them, but my sister never left me alone with her children after that. Most of my gay and lesbian friends will not date a bisexual, so the bis I know end up with other bis (less often) or in apparently "normal" binary relationships. Transgender folks (including transsexuals and transvestites, among many other groups, including my favorite tribe, the gender queers and gender fuckers) seem to have a hard time in either the gay or the straight world - the gay world sees them as a political liability, and the straight world is, I think, scared of them. Transgender people cause straight folks to think about their own gender identity in ways that make them uncomfortable.

You know, the other thing that seems silly to me, is that the LGB community still largely buys into the heteronormative sexual identity (you're either gay or straight, or one of those weird bi people who like both) and the binary gender identity - it's either male or female. And then there's polyamory, which I do not buy into, but many other pan or omni folks do.

Anyway . . . .

First up, however, is an integrally inspired article from Beams and Struts a couple of months back.

Not Gay Enough: Closing the Closet Door on Bisexual, Transgender and Questioning Individuals

Written by Abbie Kopf

Young liberation movements are consumed by the act of defense – fending off attacks on character and, unfortunately in many cases, person. Marginalized groups spend the formative years of their crawl into mainstream acceptance combating the propaganda of legislators and moral leaders, who warn “normal” folks of the impending moral apocalypse, brought to you by the unmentionables. For the LGBT community, our identity has been defined by outsiders through the incendiary characterizations that we’re child molesters, abominations, mentally ill, incestuous, vulgar, sex-crazed, perverted, subversive and unable to control ourselves. Fortunately, in excruciating increments we’re gaining victories and reticent support across the ideological and political spectrum. Far from accepted, yet light years ahead of where we’ve been, we’re hurtling towards unprecedented visibility not as scourges of humanity but as people who simply want to love freely and equally.

Don’t Ask Don’t Tell’s recent repeal highlighted the dissolving effectiveness of the tired arguments which have, for so long, weighed us down in nonsense. Those in favor of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell came out swinging with the golden oldies, explaining that if gays were allowed to serve openly in the military, unsuspecting soldiers would be raped in the shower, unit cohesion would be obliterated and the barracks would turn into a giant orgy. Yet curiously, and perhaps for the first time, the public wasn’t buying it. In fact, an overwhelming 67% of Americans supported the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.

As we win these landmark battles with greater frequency, our identity will be less defined by fanatical homophobes and we can begin the arduous task of self-defining who we are. So far, our simple explanation has been that we’re just like heterosexuals, with the exception that we’re gay. We want the same things as our breeder brethren: a spouse, job security, a nice house and maybe some kiddos. We just want it with the same sex. In essence, we’ve made heterosexuality and homosexuality two sides of a coin which, regardless of how it lands when flipped, is joined by a common sexual structure.

Read the whole post.

* * * * * *

This last one comes from Rachel Rabbit White. And for the record, dang, those guys in the photo below are skinny as hell.

Who’s Afraid of Bisexual Men?

14thJun. × ’10

By Rachel Rabbit White

I’m sitting on the edge of the bed. The room is dark, filled with the sound of flesh smacking flesh and throaty “ahhhhhs.” Next to me are huddles of middle aged men, standing, pants-off, half-hard. I’m sitting upright, purse in lap feeling a bit overdressed.

In front of me is a triple set of couples, all in the doggy-style position, fucking in front of a mirror. Guy on girl, guy on guy, guy on girl. The earthy smell of anal sex filters the air.
It’s a swinger party. Or “lifestyle party” if you prefer. But something here is different. This party is Chicago’s first and only all bisexual lifestyle party. Usually, guy on guy sex is sort of not allowed.

I’m here undercover, doing a story for Gapers Block (click for entire story) In the lifestyle, I’ve learned, male bisexuality is taboo. Just like on TV or in small towns or high-schools.

I admire bisexual men. Not only do I find them strong and courageous and cool but I have a thing for them. They’re my “type.” Or, everyone is secretly bi and I just pull it out of the guys I date. Okay, I don’t *really* believe that, but because I’m bi, I tend to assume everyone else is too.

Read the whole article.

* * * * * *

 
Finally, the Sexuality, Gender, and the Body blog posted an article on the basics of bisexuality. Nothing new, but they did offer some good links at the end, which I am including below.

Links

• Wikipedia is always good: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bisexuality
• Richard Von Krafft-Ebing thought that bisexuality was the natural state of being: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Freiherr_von_Krafft-Ebing
• Recent coming-out of an actress in True Blood: http://www.okmagazine.com/2010/06/anna-paquin-on-being-bisexual-it-wasnt-like-it-was-a-big-secret/
• The Bisexual Examiner: http://www.examiner.com/x-3366-Bisexuality-Examiner~y2009m7d15-Bisexuality-101-Am-I-bisexual
• Ridiculous quiz: http://www.allthetests.com/quiz19/quizpu.php?testid=1155452146&katname=Test-yourself-in-questions-of-love
• NY-Times Article: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/05/health/05sex.html?_r=1
• Religious Tolerance: http://www.religioustolerance.org/bisexuality.htm
• BiBasics: http://out.ucr.edu/pdf/BiBasics.pdf
• Arousal patterns of bisexual men: http://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/ps/bisexuality.pdf

Julia Serano - Bisexuality does not reinforce the gender binary

Hmmm . . . the word "bisexual" clearly denotes a binary of sexual/gender identity and preference, the bi- prefix makes that obvious. However, the lived experience of most people others would identify as bisexual is not really about the bi- part, and more about the people part.1

On the other hand, I am one of those people to whom she is referring - I do not identify as bisexual, although I have fallen in love with a man, and have chosen to be with a woman who I love deeply as my life partner. There is no word that I am aware for people who fall in love with individuals, regardless of gender and/or sex identity (Sophie B Hawkins identifies herself as an omnisexual rather than a bisexual). But I guess the politically correct term is pansexuality.

Anyway, this is an interesting article.

Bisexuality does not reinforce the gender binary

Bisexuals have been unfairly accused of reinforcing the notion that there are only two genders and thereby oppressing trans people. But those who make such criticisms of bisexuality are actually the ones doing the marginalizing, writes Julia Serano.

10 October 2010

Increasingly these days, I come across people who are ostensibly bisexual—in that they partner with both women and men—but who refuse to identify with that term.

Now this, in and of itself, is not necessarily a bad thing, as words (and especially identity labels) evolve over time and invariably go in and out of fashion.

What does bother me, however, is the explanation that is often given for this lack of identification: That the word bisexual supposedly “reinforces the gender binary,” or “reinforces the notion that there are only two genders.”

As a bisexual-identified trans woman*, I find this argument extremely problematic for a number of reasons.

While there may be an infinite number of potential genders, there are two general types of sexed bodies: female and male. Granted, there is a lot of variation within, and some overlap between, these categories (e.g., intersex people, trans people who physically transition from one sex to the other).

However, this variation and overlap does not automatically invalidate the existence of female and male bodies, but rather it simply means that these categories are far more complex than most people are willing to acknowledge.

In addition to this, we live in a society where all people are automatically (and often nonconsensually) read as either female or male, and where different assumptions, expectations and restrictions are placed on a person based upon which of these two sexes they are perceived to be.

The reason why I identify as bisexual is two-fold.

First, on a physical level, the attraction that I feel toward male-bodied people feels very different to me on a visceral level than the attraction that I feel toward female-bodied people. And having sex with a female partner feels very different to me than having sex with a male partner.

Such feelings are difficult to put into words, and I am not quite sure what the source of this difference is, but presumably it is related to what makes exclusively homosexual or heterosexual people attracted to one sex or the other, but not both.

I know that some people describe themselves as pansexual, which may work well for them, but I personally am not a big fan of that label with regards to my own sexuality, as it erases the way in which my attraction toward women is different from the attraction I experience toward men (and vice versa).

The second, and far more important reason (at least for me), why I embrace the word bisexual is that people perceive me and react to me very differently depending on whether the person I am coupled with is (or appears to be) a woman or a man.

In the hetero-mainstream, when I am paired with a man, I am read as straight; when I am paired with a woman, I am read as queer. In queer settings, when I am paired with a woman, I am read as lesbian/dyke/queer and viewed as a legitimate member of the community.

But when I am paired with a man (especially when the man in question is cisgender), then I am not merely unaccepted and viewed as an outsider, but I may even be accused of buying into or reinforcing the hetero-patriarchy.

So in other words, the “bi” in bisexual does not merely refer to the types of people that I am sexual with, but to the fact that both the straight and queer worlds view me in two very different ways depending upon who I happen to be partnered with at any given moment.

This aspect of the bisexual experience is not captured by the word “pansexual,” nor by the more general word “queer.” In fact, I regularly call myself queer, and when I do, people often are surprised when I mention that I date men (as though in their minds, bisexuality does not truly fall under the queer umbrella).

Anyone who is familiar with the history of the bisexual movement can tell you that the reason why some queer people began outwardly identifying as bisexual rather than as gay or lesbian (the two predominant queer identities throughout the ’70s and ’80s) is precisely because of this insider/outsider issue.

So long as a bisexual woman was only sexual with women and called herself a lesbian, she was accepted. But as soon as she admitted to, or acted upon, her attraction to men, she would be ostracized and accused of being a part of the problem rather than the solution.

This is why the label bisexual came into prominence—as a way to gain visibility within the queer community and to fight against exclusion.

Back in the ’50s and ’60s, all LGBT people were simply called “homosexual.” We were all present during the first queer uprisings and the early days of what was simply called “gay liberation.”

But as the movement picked up momentum, bisexuals and trans folks were both thrown under the bus, albeit for slightly different reasons. In a world where the straight mainstream assumed that gay men wanted to be women and lesbians wanted to be men, it is not surprising that many lesbians and gays felt uneasy about the presence of trans people in their movement.

And in a world where the straight mainstream insisted homosexuals could become heterosexual if they simply set their minds to it, it is not surprising that many lesbians and gays felt uneasy about the existence of bisexuals.

While the reasons for bisexual and transgender exclusion from lesbian and gay communities during the ’70s and ’80s may be somewhat different, the rhetoric used to cast us away was eerily similar: We, in one way or another, were supposedly “buying into” and “reinforcing” heteronormativity.

Transsexuals, transvestites, drag artists, butches and femmes were accused of apeing heterosexist gender roles. Bisexuals were accused of purposefully seeking out heterosexual privilege and (literally) sleeping with the enemy.

According to many lesbians and gays (both past and present), bisexuals and trans folks are not merely assimilationist, but we don’t even exist! According to this “homo-normative” logic, trans people are really gay men and lesbians who transition in order to pass in the straight world. And bisexuals are really either heterosexuals dabbling in a bit of sexual experimentation, or gays and lesbians who just haven’t fully come out of the closet yet.

It is because of this history of erasure and exclusion that bisexual and trans activists became more outspoken in the late ’80s and early ’90s, and fought for visibility and inclusion within the lesbian/gay/queer umbrella.

While most queer acronyms include Bs and Ts these days, our communities still remain largely invisible and have little voice in the now relatively mainstream LGBT movement. And the rhetoric that has been used against us for decades (i.e. that we are “assimilationist” and “reinforce heterosexism”) can still be heard in gay/lesbian/queer communities to this day.

This is precisely what makes my blood boil when I hear people say that the word bisexual “reinforces the notion that there are only two genders.”

First, it insinuates that self-identified bisexuals somehow oppress trans people. While I’m sure that there are some bisexuals out there who harbor anti-trans attitudes, in general, I have found that bisexuals are exponentially more accepting of trans folks, and way more likely than to consider us to be legitimate romantic and sexual partners, than the exclusively homosexual majority in our community.

So the idea that bisexual-identified people are oppressing trans folks is both wildly inaccurate and ahistorical, as it ignores the decades of marginalization both our communities have faced at the hands of the exclusively homosexual majority.

Second, exclusively homosexual people have been accusing bisexuals of “reinforcing” this or that for decades because of who we sleep with, and now we are supposedly “reinforcing the gender binary” simply by calling ourselves bisexual?

Knowing the long history of homosexual attempts to obliterate bisexuality using the “reinforcing” trope, it is difficult for me to view this as anything other than part of the systematic erasure of bisexuality from queer communities.

And can somebody please tell me how the term “bisexual” somehow reinforces the binary, yet “gay” and “lesbian” supposedly do not?

Most self-identified lesbians use that term to signify that they partner with women, but not men. Most gay men use the term “gay” to signify that they partner with men, but not women. So why are gays and lesbians not accused of “reinforcing the notion that there are only two genders”? Oh, that’s right, because their identities are accepted and seen as legitimate, while bisexual identities are not.

The funny thing about gay/lesbian/queer folks (and this can also be said about many feminists as well) is that often we are just as prejudiced as people in the straight mainstream, we just use different language to express it.

When somebody is transgender, or transsexual, or bisexual, or engages in BDSM, or sex work, and/or expresses themselves in a feminine manner, we almost reflexively accuse them of “buying into the system” or of “reinforcing” heterosexism/patriarchy/the gender binary/capitalism/insert-evil-hegemonic-ideology-of-choice-here.

For me, the word “reinforcing” is a red flag: Whenever somebody utters it, I stop for a moment to ask myself who is being accused of “reinforcing” and who is not. There is almost always some double standard at work behind the scenes.

And given the turbulent history of who gets to be considered inside and outside of the gay/lesbian/queer community, it does not surprise me that the only people who are never accused of “reinforcing” the hetero-patriarchal-gender-binary are non-feminine, cisgender, exclusively homosexual folks.

The word bisexual may not be perfect, but it does have a rich political history, one that involves fighting for visibility and inclusion both within and outside of the queer community.

If the word does not resonate with you personally, then simply do not use it. But if you happen to forgo identifying with the word, don’t dare say that it is because you believe that bisexual “reinforces the notion that there are only two genders,” as that claim goes beyond personal statement, and enters the realm of accusation, as it insinuates that people who openly call themselves bisexual (e.g. me) are at best, naive about gender politics, and at worse, oppressing trans people.

If anything, it is the “reinforcing” trope that has historically been used to undermine both bisexuals and trans folks, and we should learn to stop using the very same language that has been used to marginalize us in the past.

Julia Serano is an Oakland, California-based artist, activist, and author of Whipping Girl: A Transsexual Woman on Sexism and the Scapegoating of Femininity. More about all of her creative endeavors can be found at juliaserano.com.

* In many of my past writings (for example my book Whipping Girl), I have described myself as a lesbian/dyke. What can I say, other than “Things change, people change, hairstyles change...”

Tags: Julia Serano, Bisexuality, gender binary, The Scavenger, bisexuality, gender roles, sex roles, sexual identity, gender identity, gender studies, relationships