People in the bisexual community have frequently noticed that bisexual men seem to be looked down upon much more than bisexual women. Or, at first glance, bisexuality in women is much more accepted and celebrated than bisexuality in men. Why is this? The following is an edited version of my answer to this question on the BiNet USA email list.
First off, let me make a disclaimer: I am not talking about all straight men here, just most of them. Thankfully many straight men to not subscribe to the insecurities I describe here.
It seems that the current understanding of women’s bisexuality is not threatening to straight men. In fact, it is far from threatening – the idea of bisexuality in women is useful to straight men in a number of ways.
First and most obviously, it provides straight men access to threesome fantasies. Of course, the bi women in these fantasies may only superficially resemble actual bi women. In other words, there is a certain sort of bisexual woman that these fantasies are evoking, namely a woman whose sexual and romantic interactions with other women are really performed for the pleasures of men. This false idea of bi women is also used to undermine lesbianism. For most straight men, the most threatening aspect of lesbianism is that these women are not available to them. However, if a man can imagine lesbians as actually being like bi women, and then imagine that the bi women are really just straight women with a slight bonus of doing threesomes, then lesbians somehow magically become available. It is possible to see this entire chain of logic hard at work in fake-lesbian and bisexual pornography produced for the straight male gaze.
Of course, actual bisexual women rarely resemble this fantasy. So while the vague notion of bisexuality in women is appealing to these men, the appeal ends the moment things vary from the fantasy script. For example, when she starts having sex with another woman without men involved in any way. The oppression of bi women therefore takes on a form that is fairly unique among queers: the straight world is all too happy to promote bisexuality in women, but it is promoting something that is not actually bisexuality (as it is commonly practiced), and it is promoting it for all the wrong reasons. I do not think that bi women have it much better than bi men.
Bisexual men are problematic because they directly threaten the heterosexual integrity of straight men, by blurring the border between straight and gay. This doesn’t seem like a big deal, but it is: it is absolutely crucial to many straight men that they are not pushed to consider or defend their own sexuality. (This is a common strategy of oppression: the normative group maintains their power by not subjecting themselves to scrutiny.) Also, bi men might hit on them. Even worse, bi men might somehow travel undercover in the straight world, since they do not necessarily carry the markers or stigma of gay men. The “bi men are going to infect straight women with HIV” moral panics reflect this fear.
So in the ideal world of straight men, all the women would be bisexual and none of the men would be bisexual. Conveniently, some straight men (or at least people working for straight men) have produced “scientific” research that says exactly this, and then got the New York Times to print their conclusions (registration required). Isn’t that nice?
You might wonder why I have only been discussing the viewpoint of straight men. After all, aren’t they just one group among many others within the overall culture?
Of course, they are not. Our culture and institutions have largely been bought and paid for, and the owners are almost always straight men, and even worse, they are the particular sort of straight men who subscribe to the above notions. These are the people we see in corporate boardrooms and government positions, and they fully own the media, and have no qualms about using that ownership to dictate content. Even if we step away from institutions and obvious positions of power, straight men wield privilege that is not available to women or queers.
In sum, the general cultural attitude towards bi men and bi women is coming from only one place: the needs of straight men.
There is a common trap we fall into when discussing cultural norms and oppression that is managed via people’s attitudes. We assume that the culture is monolithic, and neutral. Of course, it is not. When referring to culture-wide attitudes, instead of asking “why to people think this?” it is often much more useful to ask “why do straight white men think this, and how do they export their opinions to the rest of us?”.
freaksexual 
March 15, 2007 at 4:25 am
“First off, let me make a disclaimer: I am not talking about all straight men here, just most of them. Thankfully many straight men to not subscribe to the insecurities I describe here.”
I wish there were a word to lump these sort of more open men under. And I think there may be more of them out there than you think. I’ve certainly been surprised. We just don’t know what to call ourselves, and how to stand up and be counted.
Because “straight (white) male” has associated with it so much negative crap that you’ve described here, I’ve never really felt comfortable labeling myself that way and taking on any of that guilt by association. But on the other hand, my attractions to men are rare enough that I feel dishonest claiming the title “bi” either.
There needs to be a better way to describe “mostly straight white male who is comfortable flirting and making out with bi guys, and potentially more in the right circumstance…”
*grin*
– chris
May 25, 2011 at 1:21 pm
One thing is that there’s a definite paradox here. Whilst the world at large is yes ‘owned’ by the ‘straight white collared paranoid male’, there is also this nearly endless spectrum. Even people who are pretty liberal and open minded often miss this paradox that exists. While the world is black and white, it is also a whole range of colours and shades of gray. Yes, people get picked on because of catagories and us as humans catagorize endlessly, the catagories also are endless and makes for a full cycle. We catagorize until we find there’s actually no catagories, even in a world that provides us with these concrete catagories every day.
I don’t think I’ve even been researched to be able to be fitted into any catagory. I’m a slightly bi-sexual, female to male transexual who has all of the signs as both male and female. Male in appearance and in half of my mannerisms, behaviour, thought process etc, and half female in mannerisms etc. I have found in life, that yes, these stigmas are very much alive, but they’re also so impossible to pin to anything solid at the same time.
Instead, I focus on my character, personality, figuring out what things I would like to work on in my life and being as free as I can in a world that wants to peg me in boxes. I may be a total freak to some, but to others I’m an inspiration to still be alive. Either way, I’m still me – as no matter what articles are written pertaining to any aspect of your being, you will always be you.
March 27, 2013 at 2:59 pm
I was feeling the same way Chris, then I realized that we need to become part of the “white male” picture. We need to change the structure from the inside out… And we do that by BEING the open minded white guy. Maybe we are the white buisnes guy, and maybe we are not. But we make change by showing others that caring sensitive white guys are out there everywhere, in all walks of life. We are more abundant than it seems and WE need to become the new definition of “white men”.
May 9, 2014 at 12:50 am
fortunately, there is a word for that- it’s heteroflexible
March 15, 2007 at 4:46 am
I wish there were a word to lump these sort of more open men under.
There’s a number of terms, depending on what we are talking about. To describe someone who is heterosexual but queer-positive, “straight ally” or “het ally” both work. To describe someone who is straight but not uptight about it, I’ve heard “heteroflexible”, and I think there are some other terms.
Because “straight (white) male” has associated with it so much negative crap that you’ve described here
There’s a big discussion here about privilege. While some of the most egregious abuses of power come from the guys with more power, there’s a trickle-down effect where people like you and I still get some level of privilege just from being straight or bi white guys. (For example, I am aware that my job situation is largely dependent on my gender and skin color.) I think as people start to understand this, they want to flee from the labels, which is somewhat understandable. Certainly I have had that urge. However, the better response is to acknowledge the privilege and find ways to counter privilege by fighting each particular form of oppression: homophobia, racism, and sexism.
July 25, 2007 at 7:11 pm
[…] It’s the straight men, silly […]
October 15, 2007 at 9:08 pm
[…] It’s the straight men, silly […]
December 4, 2007 at 5:28 am
I would like to suggest that around these issues, for straight men (specifically the kind you are talking about, who are privileged to define social norms) it’s the cock, stupid.
While I generally do not buy into the Freudian tendency to explain society and people in terms of genitalia, when it comes to sex, our cultural outlook is exceedingly and literally phallocentric. (My q&d proof: what are people counting when they keep track of how many times the “did it”?) If a cock is involved it’s real sex; if there’s no cock, it isn’t.
Male/male sex is real, and powerful for that reason (and frightening), whether it’s exclusively gay, or bi (with, as you point out, the added issue of bis “passing” and some how contaminating the Real Men).. Lesbians are frightening to the extent, and only to the extent, that they appear to stand a chance of demonstrating that you can have real sex without a penis.
Bi women, on the other hand, can be easily read as buying into the whole Penis Is All thing, and the female/female aspects written off as very fancy foreplay. While this may be weird or perverted, it doesn’t threaten The Way Things Are directly.
(Oh, and as for what to call the “good” straight guys: my late husband, who if not hopelessly heterosexual had certainly never found the right man, was best described as a straight member of the queer community.)
December 4, 2007 at 11:46 pm
Mama Rosa:
While I generally do not buy into the Freudian tendency to explain society and people in terms of genitalia, when it comes to sex, our cultural outlook is exceedingly and literally phallocentric.
I’m also not a fan of Freudianism. However, Freudianism is not needed for to explain this one: our culture obsessively uses the penis (and to a lesser extent, the testicles) as a symbol of power.
I agree with what you say about how this plays into straight men’s feelings on other sexualities, with the one caveat that while lesbianism is mostly rendered invisible in the larger culture, I think it is still quite threatening to straight men, because lesbians don’t properly worship the penis.
On a side note, this is the reason that penises must be hidden (say, in movies), because their implied presence is more powerful than their actual reality, given that they are floppy bits of flesh hanging down from the stomach with a tendency to misbehave. Perhaps we need to come up with a new Freudian neurosis, something about a man’s fear that his particular penis does not live up to the culture’s overwhelming and ridiculous expectations for penises.
December 6, 2007 at 7:26 pm
I’m uncomfortable admitting that Straight White Males have privilege. I don’t LIKE looking at things through the lens of an us-them dichotomy, especially because I used to be a white male, and at one time I even thought I was straight. I like a variety of straight white guys, and have worked a lot to get to the point where I can interact with and befriend them without being unrealistically nervous. I don’t want to throw that away.
Above all, I’m very wary of activism going from the level of seeking equality to the level of seeking to turn the tides AGAINST straight white men. Though I personally would not directly suffer from such a change, I could not stand to see my SWM friends suffer in the way that I and my comrades have suffered. That’s not justice – that’s animal revenge.
All of that being said, SWM dominance in society and the dominance of the SWM gaze simply cannot be ignored. To borrow Al Gore’s phrase, it’s an inconvenient truth indeed.
December 6, 2007 at 8:00 pm
Anja:
In this essay I was attempting to point out the extent to which the desires of heterosexual white men (HWMs?) run the culture, and the manner in which we fail to consider that as a possibility even when it is staring us in the face.
I’m not trying to turn the tide against HWMs (which realistically is not happening anytime soon, though there are often minor victories of this sort). I think we can differentiate between a system of power that runs the culture and the people in that system. Most HWMs I know (which is a self-selecting group) would rather not be given over-the-top priority or cultural power. Power imbalances are beneficial to the winners of any particular dynamic (sexism, racism, homophobia) but they always come with a very dear price tag none the less, and usually even the winners would be better off without the power imbalance. One of the best ways to convince HWMs to cede power is as a self-improvement program, as it will directly improve their lives.
One example of this can be found in polyamory. The system of cultural monogamy has historically worked against women, even though it is supposed to apply to everyone. Polyamory represents a certain sort of truce in the monogamy wars, where people drop or rein in their jealousy, possessiveness, and sense of ownership. Polyamorous men (who have signed on to this truce) have a lot more freedom than their men counterparts who have not dropped the above dynamics. To put it more bluntly, I’m living in what most HWM would consider to be a sexual dream world because of this truce, but I can only do that because I’ve dropped a lot of things considered to be male prerogatives.
That’s a complex argument, but the basic principle is easy to see: calling a truce and trying to dismantle any particular power dynamic (which means that everyone, including the oppressors, understands that dynamic) is really beneficial, even to the people who were formerly on top.
February 22, 2008 at 7:37 pm
Hello Peppermint,
I like this essay, and especially like that it was written by a man. I think there should be a word for the special flavor of apprecition when someone “other” gets how it is for [my kind]. Not that the essay is all about getting how it is for women, but there is certainly some indication that you get it some…..
So, here are a couple of minor notes:
if a man can imagine lesbians as actually being like bi women, and then imagine that the bi women are really just straight women with a slight bonus of doing threesomes,
The imagination part is not just that bi women really are just straight women — it is also imagination about how the straight women are. So, start with imaginary qualities in the straight women, and THEN imagine the bi women are like THAT.
Regarding Chris’ question “I wish there were a word to lump these sort of more open men under. “ the first word that comes to mind for me is feminist But I don’t know if that really covers all the stuff you have in mind, or how you think of it. But try it on. For me the combination of “bisexual” and “feminist” seems a good one. It is a start, anyway, at deflecting both the sexy-available-babe idea AND the traitor-ot-lesbians idea. (I’m female).
The oppression of bi women therefore takes on a form that is fairly unique among queers: the straight world is all too happy to promote bisexuality in women, but it is promoting something that is not actually bisexuality (as it is commonly practiced), and it is promoting it for all the wrong reasons. I do not think that bi women have it much better than bi men.
I don’t actually experience that the straight world (or any world) is all too happy to promote bisexuality in women. I think bisexuality in women sets off numerous red warining sirens, and, in addition, also sets off some of the hot-babe-who-wants-sex-with-anyone sorts of reactions you cite. But remember that these exist along with many other reactions, which makes it complicated. Also these kinds of sexy ideas are generally going to be somewhat more covert/individual because they are about SEX, which many folks consider to be a private matter. So, all but the hardcore redneck sexist type men will not actually admit to these motivations (in many situations). This kind of motivation won’t, for example, be used (or discussed) in setting policy for housing, the military, or corporations. This doesn’t mean that the porno industry doesn’t do just fine with bi women. I think this is the sort of thing that you are getting at when you say that the promotion is of “something that is not actually bisexuality”. I might change that a bit, but I think we are thinking of the same (or similar) things. I’d say that there is a narrow (but real) aspect of bisexuality that is “promoted’. Which is not different, really, from the narrow (but real) aspects of women that are promoted (in heterosexual women) by the sort of SWM you’re discussing. Women aren’t whole people — what else is new?? I described it as “imaginary” aspects [or heterosexual women] above — and now I’ve said it is narrow “but real”. I’m not sure which is a better description. Anyway, if we take into account the threatening aspects of bisexuality (in women), that does get us closer to a whole picture. None of which is to deny that bi men get a very different “deal” (than bi women) and are threatening to (many or most) SWM in ways that bi women are not.
February 22, 2008 at 8:22 pm
So, start with imaginary qualities in the straight women, and THEN imagine the bi women are like THAT.
Right – I neglected to take this all the way back to straight women. If you start with imaginary qualities that men desire in straight women, and then project those on to bisexual women, and then project what you end up with onto lesbian women, you’ve just created imaginary qualities that benefit men and span all sexualities. And in fact our culture does this to a certain extent: attempts to create women out of the imaginations of men.
This of course never quite succeeds, since women are people and have agency and all that. But it does succeed partially, and we can use some of these bisexual qualities as an example of how control-via-culture functions.
I’d say that there is a narrow (but real) aspect of bisexuality that is “promoted’. Which is not different, really, from the narrow (but real) aspects of women that are promoted (in heterosexual women) by the sort of SWM you’re discussing.
Right. I think I overstated this in the original essay. Really, all actual bisexual women are real, and the type of bisexuality that men promote is in fact real in some bi women or to some extent in many bi women. And trying to cast it as false erases these women. I think Baumgardner makes this point pretty well in Look Both Ways.
That said, some aspects of bi women are promoted and others are downplayed or erased by the larger culture, and I think we can attribute this to men’s fantasies of bi women.
I also want to throw out that while this is deeply problematic in a number of ways, this sort of quasi-acceptance of women’s bisexuality may be contributing to the fact that more women than men are out as bisexual. Which is not to say that being a bi woman is any easier than being a bi man (it’s too hard to compare to make that statement), just that that the particular step of being out might be easier. The CDC did a survey in 2002 that listed 1.8% of men age 18-44 and 2.8% of women in the same range as identifying as bisexual.
February 22, 2008 at 9:23 pm
Yes to all that.
Regarding the last point YES AND I also consider other slants that make bisexuality more acceptable in women than men… I’m generally thinking of things you have more-or-less outlined as to why bi men ARE threatening (with maybe 1 or 2 additions — but all continuing on various sexist ideas.) And YES certainly I think that, together, this all does influence how comfortable it is to identify as bi (or how totally alienating and uncomfortable it is), and, thus, could reasonably affect how many men vs women identify as bi.
(Really picky footnotes: this survey also shows the exact same 1% difference (reversed) between the number of homosexual men (2.3%) and homosexual women (1.3%). The number of heterosexual men and women varies by only .1% one tenth of a percent. According to this survey, there are slightly more (by .5%) self-identified homosexual men (2.3%) than bisexual men (1.8%) whaeras there are more (by 1.5%) self-identified bisexual women (2.8%) than homosexual women (1.3%)… I’m not sure what this would mean but it does seem like an interesting addition to the statistics you cited.)
Here’s a thought for your next essay(s) perhaps — (and I’d be really very interested in working with you on this if you want) — If you could address the HWM with a few guidelines, tips, or bits of information for how to relate to bi men (or bi women), what would you say? Assuming that is possible (and interesting), step 2 is will it fit on a card? And step 3, can it be said in a way that is actually percieved as helpful and kind? (As an example, I have a card that can be handed to unknown bystanders by the parent of a child who has autism. It’s short, and has sort of an educational flavor. It’s generally intended to inform a bystander who may be disturbed by the child’s behavior. It’s respectful and unlikely to offend the reader — although it could be used in situations where the parent is likely to feel pretty irritated, the text is not irritated, it reads more like “helpful” and and informative and it assumes good will on the part of the reader. I’ve wondered if the same sort of thing could work in other situations. I don’t really see how this could be applied to bi people, but I think you may come up with ideas that I have not….) Or, it could be a card to hand to anyone of unknown orientation and unknown attitudes. Something that comes across as neither defensive nor irritated and can help people get along….. (Is this possible?)
Oh, and thanks for fixing my unended italics!
February 22, 2008 at 10:19 pm
Really picky footnotes: this survey also shows the exact same 1% difference (reversed) between the number of homosexual men (2.3%) and homosexual women (1.3%).
It’s tempting to look at statistics like this and conclude that 4.1% of men and women are queer period, and just split up differently among bi/homosexual lines due to various sorts of social pressure. However, it’s messier than that: there’s another 5.6% of both men and women who either said something else or refused to answer.
If we remember that the question specifically asked “homosexual, bisexual, or heterosexual”, I could see a lot of queer folks objecting and answering things like “lesbian” or “gay” or “I don’t like labels” or any number of other things. If we knew these answers we could likely sort some of them into bi-like and homosexual-like groupings, but we don’t. We’re even a bit touchy on the bi men versus bi women question, though there aren’t a lot of strong alternatives to “bisexual” if we’re talking identification: things like “heteroflexible” or “queer” are not really bi identifications.
So overall, the study should be taken as a vague hint, not gospel.
Here’s a thought for your next essay(s) perhaps — (and I’d be really very interested in working with you on this if you want) — If you could address the HWM with a few guidelines, tips, or bits of information for how to relate to bi men (or bi women), what would you say?
This is a good idea. I definitely wouldn’t be able to fit it all on a card, but here’s a quick brainstorm of things to go on it. I’d flesh out each of these.
1) Don’t assume a bi person is nonmonogamous.
2) Get over your STD panics when faced with bi men or bi women.
3) Don’t push them for threesomes or to hook up with a particular gender. They’ll do it when they want. Don’t assume they’ll be into your particular fantasy or want to get together with your friends or lovers.
4) Don’t assume they are evenly attracted to men and women. Many bi folks have different sorts of relations with men and women. And many others date genderqueer people.
5) Don’t push them to date a particular gender if they have not been. Most bisexuals do not need to date men and women simultaneously to feel satisfied with their sex lives.
6) Above all, do not question their sexuality. Do not assume that because they have only been seeing a particular gender that they are “actually” straight or gay or lesbian. Do not assign other identities to them, like “straight queer” or “heteroflexible” or “queer”. They know themselves better than you know them: trust what they say.
7) Do not pontificate on what you think bisexuality really means. Do not say “everyone is really bisexual” or anything similar. Get over your need to describe your own sexuality as if their very presence somehow threatens it.
What am I missing?
February 22, 2008 at 10:27 pm
I got two more:
8) Don’t assume they are hypersexualized or “trysexuals” or any such crap. Bisexuals have the same sex drive on average as anyone else. Do not hypersexualize them. Do not assume bi women are sluts or insatiable.
9) Use the B-word, assuming they used it first. Use it any time you describe their sexuality. Do not cover it up with other umbrella terms like “queer” unless that’s what they use. Do not use phrases like “fencesitter”, “swings both ways”, etc. These are generally just excuses to avoid saying “bisexual”.
And probably something about remembering that bisexuality is not a sign of mental disease.
February 23, 2008 at 1:07 am
Um, reading your list I’ve now remembered reading an essay with a similar list about “how to treat bi people”. I think it is in the Bisexual Resource Guide (the last printed version) and I think it is by Robyn Ochs. I’m not certain of either of those things (although I could go try to find it in the printed book. I just tried to find it online and failed to find it. Which may mean it is not online. I looked at BRC and at Robyn’s site.) Anyway, I’m still interested in your list and I hope this footnote is not wildly frustrating (in terms of re-inventing the wheel.)
February 28, 2008 at 10:57 pm
I think it is in the Bisexual Resource Guide (the last printed version) and I think it is by Robyn Ochs.
Oooh. I’ll go look this up. Not frustrating at all – these sorts of lists are really community resources, and so finding new sources and integrating them is always good.
January 12, 2013 at 11:52 pm
First of all I would like to say excellent blog! I had
a quick question which I’d like to ask if you don’t mind. I
was interested to know how you center yourself and clear your head prior to writing.
I have had a difficult time clearing my mind in getting my ideas out there.
I do enjoy writing however it just seems like the first 10 to 15 minutes
are generally wasted simply just trying to figure out
how to begin. Any recommendations or tips? Kudos!
March 19, 2013 at 3:04 am
I actually believe this specific posting , Automatic Blinds “Its the straight men, silly |
freaksexual”, truly engaging and the blog post was indeed a good read.
Thanks for your time-Marguerite
April 14, 2013 at 9:14 pm
I want to know the reason you called this blog, “Its the straight men,
silly | freaksexual”. Either way I really loved
it!I appreciate it-Alexander
May 9, 2014 at 12:55 am
that’s not to say that bi women don’t face lots of problems outside of fetishization,too- they’re more likely to become addicted something, develop anxiety disorders, have depression, experience domestic abuse, get paid less, and get raped