In this Feminist Friday post, I’m going to discuss bi1 erasure in social science research and news coverage. It’s bad enough having to do the closet hokey-pokey literally every single day of my life2, but when heterosexual/monosexual/cisgender social scientists and writers decide to pointedly ignore non-monosexual folks or write their thrilling conclusions about our personal lives without our input3, it very much affects us.
Edit: WordPress was supposed to embed posts from tumblr and didn’t. The head image is from this post.
Exhibit A: Erasure by Exclusion as Data
This very scientific article from 2012 from Scientific American (the link is from donotlink, so click away) is here to sell you a pack of lies (which hurt het folks, too!):
NO.
While it’s very worthwhile to study what makes people attracted to each other, it’s harmful and unfair to only study straight-identified college students.

Source: ghostrumors (reblog from there)
Fact 1: Your straight-identified college students are not all going to identify as straight forever. I, too, was a straight-identified college student who was so duped by the heterosexual industrial complex that I didn’t understand that I was bi even after I fell for a woman for the first time when I was 21. It literally took me over a year, during which many queer things happened, after that to come out to myself because I was totally straight, right?
Sexualities evolve over time, particularly in your 20s.
Fact 2: The length of a friendship matters. You could meet a new friend in college or anywhere and be on the fence about whether you wanted to be just friends or be more than friends, and you might have a crush on someone for a long time and not act on it because your friend is partnered or isn’t attracted to you because of gender or isn’t attracted to you, period. Sometimes crushes go away; sometimes they don’t.
Fact 3: Some of us don’t self identify because you either don’t ask or because we know that if we answer, we’ll be dismissed as “halfway to gay” (especially men) or “just doing it for attention” (especially women) or “just confused”–even by researchers, feminists, monosexuals (both straight and GL), and allies. More on this in Exhibit B.
The results of the research are actually fascinating, but what’s strange is that the conclusions drawn by the writer are completely off base:
The results suggest large gender differences in how men and women experience opposite-sex friendships. Men were much more attracted to their female friends than vice versa. Men were also more likely than women to think that their opposite-sex friends were attracted to them—a clearly misguided belief. In fact, men’s estimates of how attractive they were to their female friends had virtually nothing to do with how these women actually felt, and almost everything to do with how the men themselves felt—basically, males assumed that any romantic attraction they experienced was mutual, and were blind to the actual level of romantic interest felt by their female friends. Women, too, were blind to the mindset of their opposite-sex friends; because females generally were not attracted to their male friends, they assumed that this lack of attraction was mutual. As a result, men consistently overestimated the level of attraction felt by their female friends and women consistently underestimated the level of attraction felt by their male friends.
That’s not a function of (cis/het) men and women being unable to be friends, that’s male privilege. Men are taught to dismiss women’s sexualities, opinions, and feelings; for straight men, all women (not just the straight ones, either) must be wildly attracted to them, because that’s what women do!
This article and research also completely ignore the concept of non-monosexuality. “Homosexuals” get a blurb at the end, but not any other queer sexuality, and the researchers use old research (from 1995, the height of the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell mentality) that manages to, in one paragraph, dismiss queer women’s sexuality (note that most of the research team appears to be women), paint “homosexual” (monosexual gay men and lesbians), especially the men, as untrustworthy platonic friends, and assume that queer folks are just like straight people:
Research suggests that homosexuals have mate preferences and strategies that generally parallel those of their heterosexual counterparts; it is the sex of their desired partner that differs (Kenrick, Keefe, Bryan, Barr, & Brown, 1995). Thus, homosexual men and women should experience attraction to their (purportedly platonic) same-sex friends. Moreover, given men’s stronger short-term mating orientation, homosexual men should feel more attraction to their same-sex friends than homosexual women should to their same-sex friends
(Bleske-Rechek, Somers, Micke, Erickson, et al., Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 2012, 592-3) [emphasis mine]
What possible reason could you have for excluding queer people, especially non-monosexual ones, from your research? Listen up, researchers: you want the group who can theoretically be attracted to anyone–they also have “‘hot’ friends” and “‘not’ friends,” but those have no basis in gender. Which leads me to our next exhibit:
Exhibit B: Erasure by Inclusion as Data, or We’re Not Confused; YOU Are.
When researchers actually acknowledge the existence of bisexuals, it’s typically to treat us not as the key to understanding the sliding scale of attraction and friendship, but to conflate bisexuality with myths of bisexuality that derive from the male gaze and male privilege (the assumption that women’s sexuality is only “for” men and does not exist outside of the patriarchy). Furthermore, the correlated assumptions that bi is “half gay and half straight,” that a person’s partner(s) or lack thereof at any given time indicates sexual orientation, and that bisexuals are insincere, experimenting, or confused monosexuals are the reasons why bisexuals are more likely than monosexuals to have poor mental health, are at higher risk of intimate partner violence–particularly violence based in biphobia, and suffer from poor physical health.
male character: *flirts with many girls but has a (subtle) romantic/sexual moment with a guy*
one half of the fandom: omg did you see that, he’s sooo obviously GAY!! he’s just pretending to be interested in girls!
other half of the fandom: stop making him gay, he only flirst with girls! he and that other guy are just FRIENDS!!
bi/pan/polysexual people: *look into the camera like they’re on the office*
Source: queenofnedcan
Exhibit B is a bit of the reverse of Exhibit A: a social-science researcher publishing a blog post about an unscientific study with a lot of conjecture about bisexual motivations: Lisa Wade’s “Bisexuality and Dating on OKCupid” from Sociological Images (2010), which summarizes OKCupid-cofounder Christian Rudder’s “The Big Lies People Tell In Online Dating,” an analysis of data gathered from users of the online dating site.
While the piece is old in terms of the Internet, it’s on a huge sociology blog run by a respected feminist professor, and 2010 is recent enough in queer history that the language in original piece and the edited piece simply should not exist. Furthermore, there’s very little on Sociological Images on bisexuality itself outside of it being included nominally in “LGBT” pieces, so that doesn’t make me feel as if it’s a past mistake that has been addressed fully by paying closer attention to the voices and concerns of actual non-monosexuals.
[Lies People Tell on the Internet] “I’m bisexual.”
REALITY: 80% of self-identified bisexuals are only interested in one gender.
OkCupid is a gay- and bi-friendly place and it’s not our intention here to call into question anyone’s sexual identity. But when we looked into messaging trends by sexuality, we were very surprised at what we found. People who describe themselves as bisexual overwhelmingly message either one sex or the other, not both as you might expect. Site-wide, here’s how it breaks out:
This suggests that bisexuality is often either a hedge for gay people or a label adopted by straights to appear more sexually adventurous to their (straight) matches. You can actually see these trends in action in the chart below.
Myth: Self-identified bisexuals are secretly monosexuals and most of them are liars. But we love you bi people anyway!
Fact: “Self-identified bisexual” is already an issue because of the utter lack of choices in 2010 regarding gender and sexuality. I did my time on OKCupid rather recently, right when the additional sexual orientations and genders were approved, even later even than Facebook’s were, despite the fact that they’re extremely relevant to a dating site when you’re trying to find someone who matches you. Before the changes, you would find a lot of queer people who would write “Please note: I marked bisexual because I am bi-romantic and asexual and OKC doesn’t give me this as an option; I am a trans man but I listed myself as a lesbian because I’m interested in dating queer women and am afraid of straight violence.”
The labels exist for finding potential matches in your group(s) of interest, but the profile allows the user to explain further if they so choose. That said, having your labels recognized and available is critical.
Myth: Bisexual people are “more sexually adventurous” and therefore straight women who want to attract straight men will lie about being bi to get attention/sex.
Myth: “Again, this is just the data we’ve collected.”
Fact: No, it’s your biphobic conjectures about our motivations.

Source: soloontherocks

Source: soloontherocks “Bisexuality is not half gay and half straight. Bisexuality is not in between gay and straight. Bisexuality is not gay when dating the same gender and straight when dating a different gender. Bisexuality is not gay-ish or straight-ish. Bisexuality is its own fully independent self-contained complete orientation. It is its own flavor, not a patchwork of others. Now do you get it?”
The figure below plots age against the percent of self-identified bisexual men who message both men and women, only women, or only men. The percent that are bi in practice as well as theory message both men and women drops by about half between the ages of 18 and 54 (from about 20% to about 10%), but men in their 30s and early 40s are much more likely to message only women. Ticking biological clocks and hopes for a wife and kids perhaps?
The narrowing blue swatch may reflect the possibility that men who once identified as bisexual have come to terms with being plain ol’ gay (but the data isn’t longitudinal, so it may be a cohort thing instead of a life stage thing).
Or perhaps the distribution is the result of an interaction between age and who it’s easy to meet. Maybe young bisexual guys have an easy time meeting women and turn to the internet to meet men; whereas men in their 30s and beyond find it easy to meet men and so turn to the internet to meet women?
Myth: Bisexuals just want to have heterogamous nuclear families; bi men are secretly monosexual gay men; if you don’t message “both” (there are more than two!) genders equally, you’re not really bi.
Fact 1: Not all bisexuals experience attraction equally divided among every gender. Some people may be bi-romantic but prefer one/some gender(s) over others for sexual partners; or are bi-romantic and asexual or bisexual but aromantic; or tend to prefer to befriend or date or have sex with certain genders; or prefer to message certain people of genders on an online dating site; or just happen to be matched at a higher percentage with people with the same or a different gender.
The comments on the Sociological Images piece are real bi and non-monosexual folks talking about their experiences dating, on OKC, and in life and when both pieces are poor examples of research and exclude bi voices.
Fact 2: I am a real, live bisexual who sent messages only to women/nonbinary individuals on OKC. Why?
a. My profile was “hidden from straight people” because, while I like men, I don’t have the emotional energy to sort through all the misogynistic messages hoping to find someone who isn’t just fetishizing me.
b. Also, if I were to date a man, I’d prefer to know him in person first to make sure that he is an actual feminist and ally, because I just spent my 20s with a man who used my sexuality, gender identity, and activism to gaslight me to the point where I was convinced I couldn’t be loved by anyone.
c. This same experience of being shamed for being bi and nonbinary extended to monosexual women friends, both straight and lesbian, who shamed me for being attracted to both men and women and for my gender expression (too butch! and also too femme!), so I mostly avoided going on dates with binary lesbians because I was scared.
Gosh, how could I resist my monosexual women friends, though? Oh, wait, it’s because Bleske-Rechek et al. understand my “mating patterns” with my “purportedly platonic” women friends. Of course.
Returning to the OKC blog, the post ends on this frankly ridiculous excuse of a conclusion:
12% of women under 35 on OkCupid (and the internet in general, I’d wager) self-identify as bi. However, as you can see above, only about 1 in 4 of those women is actually into both guys and girls at the same time. I know this will come as a big letdown to the straight male browsing population: three-fourths of your fantasies are, in fact, fantasies of a fantasy. Like bi men, most bi women are, for whatever reason, not observably bi. The primacy of America’s most popular threesome, two dudes and an Xbox, is safe.
Myth: Bisexuals are only doing it for the attention from straight men. All “bisexuals” want is to be in MFF threesomes. This is the only way to express bisexuality.
Fact 1: Bisexual women do not exist for male fantasies, regardless of the partners they choose.
Fact 2: Group sex, whether as a one-time deal or an ongoing relationship (like a closed triad), should come from a place of mutual enjoyment on for all parties, not of a sole focus on male pleasure. Unless all the participants are men.
Fact 3: Male privilege is a hell of a drug. Rudder is not seeing the data objectively, he’s seeing an interpretation based on his biases and prejudices. See Exhibit A.
In Closing
When you publish research and opinion pieces that cater to the idea that bisexuals are cheaters, fakes, and liars because you couldn’t be bothered to actually listen to non-monosexual voices and interpret data based on your naive assumptions about a diverse group of people of whom you have no knowledge, you are literally killing us. People read your research, or they see summaries of it in magazines and blogs, or their friends tell them about rumors they heard which you corroborated because you couldn’t be bothered to listen to the voices of actual bi and queer individuals. Your ignorance contributes to our doctors being unable to or refusing to help us, to mental health care providers shaming us to the point of no longer wanting to seek help (actually happened to me twice), to monosexual partners thinking that gaslighting us (also happened to me) or beating us is what we deserve.
And heterosexuality isn’t “normal,” it’s just common.
You want to know if men and women can just be friends? I’ll tell you, and you can call the SSRC and tell them, too.
Yes, we can. Unless male privilege ruins it.
Notes
1. Also pansexual, omnisexual, aliasexual, polysexual erasure. My operating definition of bisexual is Shiri Eisner’s: attracted to genders who are like me and different from me.
2. You put your heterosexist-assumptions limb in, you take your monosexist-assumptions limb out, you put your gender-binary limb in and you wave it all about. You do bi hokey-pokey and turn assumptions all around, this is your living hell.
3. Nothing about us without us.
Reblogged this on Rose B Fischer.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Just Gene'O and commented:
And we’re off and running with another Feminist Friday discussion.
LikeLike
Yes. All of this. As someone with a rather fluid identity, I’ve always found it troublesome that a label is arbitrarily assigned based on whether I’m dating/married to someone and whether that person is a man or woman. It happens with lots of things, too. I’m reminded of all of the times Freddie Mercury is identified as gay rather than bisexual, which is how he seems to have identified. And it hasn’t been too long since Anna Paquin had to explain to Larry King that even though she married a man, she can and is still bisexual.
LikeLiked by 6 people
Thank you for commenting! I also get annoyed when people think they know who I am based on whom I’m with, and, for me, it was even harder when I was with monosexuals because they also tended to erase me. Did you see the latest with Cara Delevingne’s response to that awful Vogue article? http://www.salon.com/2015/07/17/cara_delevingne_sets_the_record_straight_my_sexuality_is_not_a_phase_i_am_who_i_am%E2%80%9D/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah, it’s difficult when we start talking about sexual identity sometimes. I’m a mother and married to a man, so the natural assumption is that I’m a cisgendered heterosexual. And while I am certainly cisgendered, I’m not necessarily straight, even if my chosen partner is a man. And that clearly just confuses the hell out of some folks, for some reason.
LikeLiked by 1 person
My wife and I get this assumption ALL the time, actually– the assumption that we are heterosexual because we are committed, married, religious, and have two children.
We don’t really mince words about both of us being bisexually oriented, but yep, all the old myths come out, and yes, we do often have to explain to people that they don’t apply. I don’t think even our own families understand, but the ones dearest to us aren’t fussed by such things anyways.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Both my wife and I are bisexually oriented, and we’ve faced the same confusion from people- as if our 16+ yrs of marriage, religious conviction, and two children would somehow nullify how we are attracted.
Even family and friends don’t fully understand all of this, although the ones nearest and dearest to us… they aren’t fussed, which is as it should be. The very best of them very clearly state their acceptance; they don’t have any problem understanding it that I can tell.
LikeLike
I’ve actually come out to people JUST because they were saying this stuff.
I’ve also used OKCupid, partly because it allows “bisexual” as an option, but I ended up marking “lesbian” and explaining in the profile because otherwise almost all the messages were “hey your pretty” from straight guys with 11% matches to my profile. Plus I just tend to be attracted to more women an nonbinary people, when I’m attracted to anyone at all, which is rare anyway.
I’d really like to see a study of bi people and how they form friendships and romantic relationships and if there’s a difference, but it seems we’re still a long way from that.
LikeLiked by 5 people
And you know, I just thought of mentioning this, too.
I’m really bugged by the notion of “just friends.” It trivializes friendships of all sorts and reinforces a traditional hierarchy of relationships.
LikeLiked by 5 people
Yes, I was just thinking that. My most important relationships are with my friends.
(It is somewhat complicated by how I can’t actually tell the difference between the two relationships, though. It’s just that sometimes I’m attracted to people. Sometimes they’re my friends, in which case I might want to pursue a relationship, and other times they’re not my friends, in which case I don’t. I don’t think I have a difference between “interested in being friends” and “romantically interested.”)
LikeLiked by 4 people
Have you seem Yumi Sakugawa’s “I Think I am in Friend Love with You”? http://www.buzzfeed.com/catesish/super-sweet-webcomic-about-friend-love#.xk1DqX6J8 (now a book!)
I had a very long conversation with a friend of mine from study abroad about how both of us get stressed out about friends and dating because for both of us (who are friends and not dating each other), we do the same kind of things with friends and with dates: not just dinner-and-a-movie-and-a-bar but theater and picnics and geeking out. The only difference is really kissing…! (And perhaps financial entanglement to some degree if it’s a cohabiting situation, but that’s not completely different than having a roommate in many ways.)
LikeLike
That comic is adorable.
And yeah. It’s the same, just sometimes with kissing. It doesn’t help that most people don’t analyze their relationships at all… They can’t describe any differences for me, just “It’s just DIFFERENT.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Also a great point! I think the “just friends” research was also particularly awful because the authors essentially state that queer people are suspect as “purportedly platonic” friends. I really value my friendships and I also fell in love with one of my best friends–that’s a statement of two truths, not a “but.” If a straight person did that, the researchers wouldn’t think twice, but because I’m queer, they suggest that all my friendships are suspect. And that’s frankly ridiculous.
LikeLiked by 2 people
It plays into the idea of queer and bisexual people as being somehow more promiscuous than others, which is rather absurd but still somehow a persisting stereotype. And it is very indicative of a hetero-normative society.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The asexual communities- and heck the G, L, B and T communities can teach the broader culture a lot about the value of friendship. A cumbersome but useful word I learned from the ace folks- http://wordspy.com/index.php?word=amatonormativity “The legal, cultural, and moral privileging and promotion of the romantic couple as the highest form of human relationship.”
LikeLiked by 5 people
I LOVE cumbersome words that accurately reflect situations and use them as often as possible. Thanks!
LikeLike
Relevant to this post:
http://ncase.itch.io/coming-out-simulator-2014
My favorite write-up of this game:
http://kotaku.com/a-video-game-that-really-gets-what-it-means-to-come-out-1604809982
I love this essay. Stay awesome!
LikeLiked by 3 people
Thanks for the game link and the Kotaku review of the game. It’s important to remember that coming out isn’t a process but an existence. ><
LikeLike
“The primacy of America’s most popular threesome, two dudes and an Xbox, is safe.” At least they’re working on being insulting to everyone. You’d think the more appropriate to the conclusions joke for a threesome would be a guy, his hand, and his fantasies about a threesome. Instead they needed a crack at gamers, because they’re not getting laid.
…
LikeLiked by 2 people
You’re right, and you hit on something important there, in that these things are trading ENTIRELY on stereotypes. ENTIRELY. That is not how science is done.
LikeLiked by 3 people
To be fair, that might be how Mel Brooks does science. I’ve seen Young Frankenstein.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Apparently Rudder has a book out on OKC statistics. I feel like I now have to read it to see what he says four years later, and I wonder if he actually has spoken to a bisexual or a gamer, ever. (Truth: he has, but were they comfortable enough to be out with him?)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah, that OKC commentary is gross on so many levels, including this one. I only date other geeks and I want to be friends with other geeky types so we can all geek out together. Me + date + game console is my preferred threesome 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reblogged this on Assentively Yours and commented:
Obviously, as a bisexual I can’t help but agree with this in a lot of ways. The only thing I take objection to is the strawberry ice cream cone…I really don’t like strawberry ice cream…hehehehe!
LikeLike
[…] 17 – Ask a Bisexual: Can Men and Women Ever Just Be Friends? Leah at The Lobster […]
LikeLike
[…] loved and wanted for who she is. Friendship-love is magic! This goes back to the comments on the bisexuals and friendship piece about how our culture prioritizes (monogamous heteronormative monosexual) romantic attachments […]
LikeLike
[…] In case you missed it, I wrote about bi erasure in social sciences research. […]
LikeLike
[…] Visibility Day is Sept. 23, 2017, so to kick off the festivities, I have a new “Ask a Bisexual” for […]
LikeLike