A conversation I had with a friend this week sparked a few questions around bisexuality – concerning the label itself, people’s acceptance of bisexuality, and more.
Here are a few bi-curiosities we pondered…
When you’re straight, people generally take your word for it. You don’t have to sleep with a significant number of the opposite sex to prove your inclination towards them. In fact you don’t even have to sleep with one. You could be a virgin, never even kissed a member of the opposite sex yet, and if you say you’re straight, that’s pretty much the end of it.
The same could be said of gay individuals, though perhaps not to the same extent. There may be those who want proof or can’t accept it (period), but by and large it seems our society accepts that a gay person knows that they are gay because that’s who they are and they don’t necessarily need a physical encounter to confirm it.
Why then do we question the claim of bisexuals? Those who feel they are bisexual but still have yet to be with both a man and a woman are often deemed “bi-curious.”
If someone is still questioning their sexuality and wants to identify as bi-curious (or straight-curious or gay-curious or homoflexible and heteroflexible if they rather), fine. But when someone identifies as bisexual but doesn’t have experience, why do others insist on labeling them bi-curious?
Example:I had a friend in high school who identified as bisexual. Because she had only ever dated or made-out with boys, our fellow students insisted that she was instead bi-curious. To them, unless you’d been with both a man and a woman, you weren’t really bisexual. They didn’t consider the fact that her choice of potential female partners in our school was pretty much non-existent since she was one of the rare few who were honest about their orientation.
Then there are those who deny bisexuality all together. People can be homosexual and they can be heterosexual, but that’s it. They think that anyone claiming to be bisexual are…confused? delusional? greedy?
Example:When I was younger my mom had two friends who were a lesbian couple. Both had been with men in the past (and both were again with men when they were apart in the future), but they identified as lesbians who happened to occasionally be with men. Neither accepted that bisexuality was a choice, for themselves or others.
Then there’s the grey area of where bisexuals belong, for as we know our society likes to classify and label people. Most of the time bisexuals are in the category of LGBTQ. But I recently ran into a situation which is the very thing that sparked this post. I was told by someone that bisexuals are not “queer enough.”
Example:A friend of mine is working on a project for “queer artists.” A woman applied who identifies as bisexual. The project leader rejected her application because in the interview the applicant answered honestly that she was in a long-term relationship with a man and though her preferences were for both men and women, she had never had sex with a woman. The project leader felt she “wasn’t queer enough” to be considered a “queer artist.” She continued to ponder aloud whether bisexuals should be included in the project at all or if the “queer” project should be limited strictly to gays since they were “more obviously queer.”
So when is queer “queer enough”?
And why are there so many curiosities around the definitions and acceptance where bisexuality is concerned?
I really am curious.


Digg
12 comments
I have struggled with this personally for quite some time now.
I think the path a person walks is their own, and social labels often do more to distract from larger issues of acceptance and love that IMHO underpin queer politics.
'What is queer enough' immediately does more to alienate than it does to embrace right? Which is hypocritical the queer tent should be a damn big tent - that's the point of queer right? That it's open to the widest possible interpretation, that anyone can be queer, that's what I love about it. It's a term that defies definition, by definition.
Speaking personally, after a difficult coming out process where I struggled to accept myself as a lesbian, I dated (bio)women exclusively for about 7 years. Then in a sudden reversal I feel in love with a man, and have since more or less dated (bio)men for another 6 years. That doesn't mean I don't have fantasies that involve all sorts of people, and it doesn't negate that I get crushes on many different kinds of people, some of whom don't really follow a binary anyways.
Lately for my own peace of mind I have decided being queer is about *how* I love people, ie; egalitarian, respectful, non-proprietary, rather than *to whom* I choose to express it.
Anyways, that is my 2 cents.
Posted by miriam
January 7, 2010, 1:32 PM
Bravo D. Cole! Bravo!
Thank you for this honest and compassionate look at who "we" are --
I am left asking (as I have before) -- why in some contexts does it matter what our sexual preferences are? I understand that you may feel you want to identify your sexual preference for the purposes of having sex or partnering more permanently, -- but why else? Why would it matter whether someone is queer or not in order for them to have their art recognized? Perhaps the person in charge of the project (who may have the best intentions) -- needs to step back and consider what it is she's wanting to accomplish with this project... is it that she wants to give people a chance to have their work shown who have not had that chance otherwise because of some queer discrimination... if that's the case, maybe that's what the criteria should be... exclusion. And, if that's the criteria -- well, the woman who you talk about who was excluded from this project now qualifies.
Whatever the case, whatever the reasons for this project, I think there needs to be more thinking done around this issue -- and I thank you and your friend for having the conversation, and sharing it with us. It's an important start.
Posted by BlueGaia
January 7, 2010, 1:57 PM
Good points from everyone here. I must predicate what I say with the disclaimer that I have little experience or education with the topic concerned. I have to wonder if the root of the problem is insecurity. If one expresses an attraction to both sexes one straddles three communities at least -- lesbian, bisexual and straight. From a cautious perspective why identify with bisexuality and risk rejection from one or more of those communities, if you can help it? So you dismiss the idea of bisexuality. Fair enough, if that helps you feel safe, I say, just as long as you don't bash any other bisexuals. If you only limit yourself, fair enough. People have to choose their own freedom in order to be free, in this case, I think.
For the school kids, other issues are at stake. The implication of insisting on proof is that only a true bisexual would become sexually involved with both sexes, which is untrue. But it's as good a bisexuality test as anyone can think of. Why do we need a test? Because there's a fear that bisexuality means your sexuality is more undetermined than you're willing to say. Undetermined sexuality is something the youth world is afraid of and wants to root out. Because there's so much insecurity. Because chances are there's a lot of it. And yet this is the time when many of us become sexually adventurous. And so, everybody puts on this charade that they know what their sexuality is about and can prove it (even and especially straight guys, despite how easy they seem to have it, in term of being accepted) and yet we're always suspicious that we don't know the whole truth. This is about paranoia, I think.
Maybe the fear of the woman running the art collective was that a bisexual whose relationship experience is in the straight world would tell a straight story with her art and thus that it would be inappropriate. In any case her actions are unacceptable. Communities need to adapt the attitude that they exist to let as many people in as possible while still protecting their values, as far as I can see. If we're all for a good cause we need eachother, because we need all the help we can get.
Posted by Myra
January 7, 2010, 9:45 PM
Great article. In highschool, I remember my best friend and I used to discuss this, and how it seemed obvious sexuality was a spectrum and not fixed. Why people would still be bent on ensuring someone was "queer enough" is beyond me. Especially someone whose job it is to be supporting queer artists. Like Miriam said above, it's not about who you love, it's about how you love.
Posted by Shona
January 8, 2010, 6:40 AM
In response to Myra's comment on the woman running the art collective...
Although I disagree with the organizer's idea that bisexuals should be excluded entirely from a queer art show, I can see where she was coming from with her decision. I think that many times, lesbians or gay men will exclude bisexuals (especially those who are currently in heterosexual relationships) because they see the bisexuals as accepting straight privilege. In this art collective example - while as gay artists have long been excluded from the mainstream art/film/literary world, a woman in a relationship with a man would benefit from being perceived as straight and thus wouldn't necessarily suffer from the same prejudice as a gay man or woman. Perhaps the organizer believed the few spots in the show should be reserved for those members of the queer community who were most likely to be excluded elsewhere.
As for the comment about not being queer enough, once again I can see where she's coming from. When you make the choice to live an openly queer life, you take the chance of suffering from hatred and violence. When you have to be the person who gets called "dyke" just for walking down the street, it's often hard to accept people who have never had to deal with that as part of your club. I am not saying this is necessarily right, I am saying I understand it. I think it's important that people be aware of their privilege and not just react automatically from a position of indignation when confronted.
Posted by Michelle
January 8, 2010, 4:26 PM
bisexuality is a word that does not relate to my gender/sexual expression, but it is one that is often placed on me. I struggled with my identity when I was younger, waffling between a straight, and lesbian identity. Eventually I decided I didn't care what you call it, but I was none of the above, and wasn't able to pick between men/women. I now identify as Queer as it is the best way for me to describe my alternate sexuality.
The way I often define it is that while I recognize that for some people gender expression is an important part of partner selection and I respect their right to select partners using gender...... I can't and don't. To me it seems about as logical as deciding based on hair colour, I know it exists, I just can't wrap my head around the how/why.
I think its important to develop new language, as bisexual is by definition a combination of straight and gay/lesbian identities, and most so called bisexuals can't relate to that definition. I am neither gay or straight and alot of the bi-phobia stems from this false definition of "bisexuality".
ie: its a phase, its a coming out process, its about unbridled lust, its about a desire for bio men & women in one sexual encounter. All these stereotypes stem from a binary understanding of sexual orientation, a binary understanding of gender, and an understanding of bisexuality as a combination of competing desires.
it also leads to other members of the GLBTQ community excluding bisexuals as they are perceived as only having half a queer identity, and are presumed to then only experience half of the oppressions of heteronormativity. In reality there is far less social support and community available to bisexuals, and most will experience exclusion and oppression from both gay & lesbians, and the straight community. This leads to increased isolation, which is known to lead to multiple negative mental health outcomes.
Posted by Aly
January 9, 2010, 10:26 AM
"a woman in a relationship with a man would benefit from being perceived as straight and thus wouldn't necessarily suffer from the same prejudice as a gay man or woman"
the key part of this is that they don't experience the SAME prejudice. This is absolutely true. But it doesn't mean they are experiencing straight priviledge. Likewise a femmy lesbian does not experience the same oppression as a trans-identified woman. But both experience oppression from heterosexism.
Likewise the "bisexual" who happens to be in a relationship with a bio-man. She is experiencing it in a different way, but she is not living straight privilege. When I am in a relationship with a bio-man, it is not a straight relationship. It is other. Which means forming complex sexual and romantic relations which are neither wholly straight or wholly lesbian, and trust me its a heck of a lot more complicated then just putting on a straight hat. While I can closet myself to attempt to gain straight privilege, as many lesbian folks do, this is hardly a privilege nor is it even possible. In addition we are all well aware of the multiple negative health outcomes of closeting oneself, which surely outweigh any supposed "straight privilege" the queer individual may gain. It also represents a very western definition of sexuality which is at odds with many first nations and global south definitions of "queer" in that it is presuming 2 genders, (ie: how do you know that the bio-man she is with is "MAN") and presuming that the person's queerness is about who they partner up with.
Posted by Aly
January 9, 2010, 10:43 AM
I don't believe that straight is something that is assumed. I know a male that although he says he is straight many people don't believe him. I am a straight woman who has no interest in being with another woman so it is quite easy for me to identify myself. In my opinion, I think the reason people have trouble accepting some bi-sexuals is due to the fact that everyone has known a woman who would get drunk and kiss other women for fun and attention and honestly for no other purpose other than that. Also, shows like a shot at love with Tila tequila confuse things for people, as one minute, she is bisexual and the next moment she is banning men and only going to sleep with women. There is no clarity due to her not admitting that a relationship whether male or female was just bad and that she wants to move on. There are many people that display the clear lines and others who blur them and confuse people. As it is their relationships no one should judge but looking from the perspective of clear identification of sexuality, I do believe this is where it becomes difficult to identify.
Posted by J
January 9, 2010, 1:01 PM
A lot of this boils down to community. To make sense of it, stop thinking about it in terms of sexual identities, but rather think in terms of ethnicity and race (which should be easy for those living in the cultural mosaic).
I went to school with people who identified as Mainland Chinese, Hong Kong Chinese, Taiwanese, and then all the hyphens (Chinese-Canadian, Taiwanese-Canadian, etc). Finally there are people who just identify as Asian, and then people who appear Asian (due to their ancestry), but identify simply as Canadian.
When these groups mix, you have something similar to LGBTQ. They share commonalities, but fundamentally they are different. At University of Toronto, there are multiple student associations to accommodate all of these identities. In other universities, many of these groups are combined. The difference is that people realize they can accomplish more with the LGBTQ (and gay-straight alliance) as one than they can with everyone separated.
So theoretically, you could have a separate organization for each L, G, B, T, and Q. If you think of it that way, it's not hard to understand why each letter won't necessarily be accepting of all the other letters all the time. LGBTQ is an umbrella term, but many of the members see each letter as mutually exclusive.
Posted by Steve
January 9, 2010, 9:45 PM
...Bi-sexuality just continues to perpetuate the construction of a gender binary. I really struggled with this label. Then I discovered the term Pansexual... seeing as how I am just really attracted to certain types of people regardless of what paraphernalia the pack in their drawers.
Posted by Serina Z
January 12, 2010, 10:55 PM
Thank you so much everyone for your awesome comments! I was hoping to receive a few thoughtful ideas, but this is wonderful!
I love the direction this is taking with the discussion of the gender binary. I agree that it limits and confuses something that is already intricate and misunderstood.
Any other thoughts?
Posted by D. Cole
January 13, 2010, 9:10 AM
As a bisexual woman in a het relationship, I *frequently* "have to be the person who gets called "dyke" just for walking down the street". Bisexual people cannot just turn off their identities when they enter a heterosexual relationship. There aren't included instructions for blending into conservative straight society, and we aren't any less 'queer' than a masculine gay man or feminine gay woman or a queer trans person who is able to pass.
I am 24, and have known I am bi for many years, however I'm still struggling with openly living queer - because of treatment from arrogant and close-minded queers. The queer community that helped their own, provided support, and a safe space left me out in the cold. The negative experiences I deal with in the straight community don't stop me from embracing my identity, as I know that many other queers also deal with it. Having to be ousted from my OWN community for suddenly "not being queer enough" just because I happened to fall in love with a man was crushing. And I am far from alone in my experience.
Luckily, I maintained close friendships with people who happened to be queer, straight allies, and met amazing new people, many of whom have encouraged me to stop hiding. I think I was unfortunate with the people I was in contact with previously, as of course, most queer people aren't so exclusionary.
I understand why some people are so resistant to accept people they see as not being one of them, and are defensive, I do. However that doesn't make it okay, and just because someone sees another as a certain label doesn't make it true.
On a completely different note....I rarely use bisexual to identify myself unless I'm talking to people I don't know well. Personally, it's a bit more complicated, but it's the closest word to my identity most people understand. And as much as I am proud of being queer, I still don't think it's absolutely everybody's business who I fancy. ;) (Really tempted by the t-shirt though!)
Posted by bella
January 20, 2010, 8:20 AM
Leave a comment
Our comment policy
Shameless prides itself on the diversity of opinions expressed by our writers, and we encourage and appreciate different points of view. Our intention at Shameless is to foster community and to maintain a safe and positive blogging environment; we do not consider it our duty to give a voice to anybody with an opinion.
Discussion on this site is moderated. We will delete comments that:
(We get to decide what's discriminatory, hateful, attacking, or inflammatory).
In some cases, we will cap off comments on a discussion when we feel they are spiralling out of control and fostering an unwelcoming space for bloggers and readers. Comments will be closed by the Web Editor, unless the post is by the Web Editor, in which case the Editor in Chief will close them.
If your comments repeatedly make the same point, they may be deleted. This also applies to comments made by multiple members of the same organization.
Your comments should be about the topic of the post, not its writer—although we certainly encourage praise for our writers, if you want to say something nice.