A Bisexual Q & A

Robyn Ochs interviews Aleta Baldwin, M.A.; Jessamyn Bowling, M.P.H.; and Brian Dodge, Ph.D.

Published in RECOGNIZE: The Voices of Bisexual Men. Find the whole book here.

Wondering what social scientists had to say about bisexual men, I contacted three researchers from Indiana University’s Center for Sexual Health Promotion in Bloomington, Indiana. Here are some data-driven, research-based responses to commonly asked questions about bisexual men.

--What is the average age at which men come out as bisexual?

One way to approach this question may be to consider when people first become aware of their sexual attractions and desires, in addition to the age at which people come out as bisexual. There is quite a bit of research surrounding “identity trajectories,” or whether there are common milestones shared by men and women on their way to identifying as gay, lesbian, bisexual, etc.

Among men who identified as either gay or bisexual, one study found that the average age at which they became aware of their same-sex attraction was between 11 and 12. The average age at which these men first self-identified as gay or bisexual was between 18 and 19; however, they didn’t begin identifying to others until their early twenties.[1]

Other studies have found that the ages of first attraction and first identification were earlier: one study found that the mean age of first same-sex attraction was 7.7 years old and first self-labeling was 16.5 years old.2 Still other studies have found that the first attraction is anywhere between 9 and 12, and first identification as gay or bisexual occurs between 14 and 16.[3] [4] [5]

While these studies each have slightly different numbers, which may be due to differences in study samples or differences in the structure of the questions, none of these ages are unusually early or late.

Unfortunately, few of these studies also ask (where applicable) at which age participants are first aware of their other-gender attraction or desires. Too few researchers are interested in sexual identity development in people who identify as heterosexual, as it is structured as the norm in our society. But it is safe to say that men and women who report same-gender attraction and desire first begin to recognize these feelings at roughly the same age that we all begin to understand our sexual attractions.

--How is this changing generationally?

One sociological study of bisexuality from the 1980s found that the men experienced their first same-gender attraction around the age of 13, only a little later than contemporary researchers are finding.[6] Though there is still stigma associated with non-heterosexuality, and still discrimination against LGBT individuals and communities, one reason why people may report bisexual attraction or identity at younger ages could certainly have to do with the increasing acceptance of diverse sexualities over the past few decades. However, as yet, there is a lack of scientific research on the “coming out” experiences of bisexual men and women, in general, and virtually no research has focused specifically on bisexual young adults.

--I notice that gay and bisexual men are grouped together in the data that you cite. Do we know whether there is any difference in average coming out age between these two groups?

In short, there has been an absence of scholarly attention to the lived experiences of bisexual individuals when compared to homosexual and heterosexual individuals across the board, including their experiences of “coming out.” Research on behavioral and self-identified bisexual individuals has been largely absent from scientific literature, including those studies that examine relationships of sexual orientation and identity with health and wellbeing. Most previous research on health issues among “lesbian, gay and bisexual” and “same-sex-attracted” populations has not distinguished bisexual individuals from lesbians and gay men.[7] The number of articles that present relevant information specifically to bisexuals in terms of health is a miniscule proportion of the published literature on sexual orientation and health. This body of research is already problematic given that operationalized classifications of sexuality (i.e., “LGB,” “same-sex attraction,” etc.) vary widely among studies.

This is concerning because although it has been established that bisexual individuals may share with lesbians and gay men some challenges on the basis of their sexual orientation and identity, particularly in regards to their same-sex practices and desires, bisexual individuals may also face additional stressors specifically on the basis of their bisexual behaviors and/or identity. The existence of “biphobia,” or the stigma and discrimination experienced by bisexual individuals from both heterosexual and homosexual individuals on the basis of their bisexual orientation and/or identity, has been extensively illuminated in activist and, more recently, scientific literature. Researchers have finally begun to investigate how bisexual individuals may experience such “double discrimination” from both heterosexuals and homosexuals and how biphobia may impact the lives and, in particular, health of bisexual individuals.

Overall, it is critical that future research on health and well-being among sexual minority populations be based on more diverse populations of bisexual, homosexual and transgender individuals—which will require sincere efforts at recruiting and engaging participants in research beyond traditional “convenience sampling” techniques in gay-identified locations. Public health research on “non-heterosexual” individuals was long based solely on samples of men and women who happened to be present in “gay-identified” venues, including gay bars, clubs, parades and community centers, resulting in samples that were highly skewed in terms of their potential representativeness in terms of age, race/ ethnicity, socioeconomic status, income, sexual identity and other factors. Generalizing to all non-heterosexual individuals from previous samples of primarily young, White, well-educated, upper-middle-class, self- identified lesbians and gay men is dangerous as results may be misleading and simplistic. Recent studies have shown that many bisexual individuals have little or no interaction in “gay” social spaces. Few researchers have made attempts to specifically recruit bisexual individuals outside of “gay” spaces from which “LGB” samples are often drawn. Future research may benefit from the development of innovative strategies to locate, recruit and examine bisexual individuals who may not frequent “gay-identified” venues.

--For what percentage of men is bisexual identity “just a phase” and for what percentage is it an “enduring” identity?

There is a lot to unpack in this question. First, we know from Alfred Kinsey’s work from the 1940s and 1950s that not all identities—be they gay, straight, bi or whatever—are always enduring. [8] For many people, the direction of our attraction and behavior is subject to change throughout the life course. When it comes to identity there is a stereotype about bisexual men in particular, that bisexuality is “a stop on the way to gay,” or that for women, bisexuality is just a phase. A component of this bi-negativity is that rarely are bisexual people equally attracted to men and women. Should a person have a same-gender primary partner and then later an other-gender primary partner, this shift contributes to the idea that their identity is somehow untrustworthy or unstable.

Most of the data we have on changes in sexual identity over time focuses on young people. One of these studies found that there was no significant difference between the number of men who consistently identified as bisexual throughout time and the number of women who consistently identified as bisexual.[9] This finding poses a direct challenge to the idea that all bisexually identified men are actually gay, and that their bisexual identification is transitional. Nevertheless, these findings are not always consistent among studies. While studies of bisexuality in young adults have found that some are likely to later identify as gay or lesbian rather than bisexual, this should not be taken as proof that bisexual identity is just a phase. Rather, it can be seen as evidence that sexual identity is not unidirectional or stagnant, that people’s erotic lives and the meanings they attach to their feelings and experiences are varied. As far as percentages go, it is difficult to find numbers. However, the studies mentioned above, which tracked sexual identification throughout time, found that about 70 percent of youth who identified as bisexual at the start of the study identified as bisexual at the end of the study.[10] [11]

One final reason why bisexuality might not be seen as enduring is because the standard of monogamy in our society makes bisexuality invisible. If a bisexual person were to enter into a long-term relationship with a same- or different-gender partner, our tendency would be to define them by that relationship, (i.e. see them as “really gay” or “really straight”) rather than acknowledge that the gender of their relationship partner doesn’t necessarily undo their sexual identity.

--I’ve heard said, “Everybody is bisexual,” and I’ve also heard said, “No one is bisexual.” What’s the truth?

The “truth” is that the concept of sexual orientation is complex, and many researchers who are interested in sexuality have noted that there are a number of issues and challenges associated with the term. One issue is that sexual orientation includes multiple dimensions, for example behavior, attraction and identity. However, many individuals do not identify consistently as a single orientation across all of these domains (for example, a person’s identity may not reflect their behavior), and many do not map consistently across all these domains and across time. In terms of identity labels, there are many people who identify as bisexual, and this alone contradicts the statement that nobody is bisexual: identity matters. This is the key issue in determining how many people are “actually” bisexual; individuals determine this for themselves. The idea that no one is bisexual stems from the misconception that those who self-identify as bisexual are in transition to being gay or straight. For a variety of reasons, many individuals do not experience an equal attraction to men and women, or engage in intimate partnerships with men and women at the same time (or ever). Additionally, the lack of visible identity for individuals (including physical presentation, social movements, and subculture) may lead them to participate in gay or straight cultures, causing further invisibility.[12] [13]

Conversely, the idea that everyone is really bisexual reflects the idea that rarely does an individual only ever feel attraction toward, or engage in sexual activity with, either men or women for all of their lives. In the same way as saying nobody is really bisexual, to categorize everyone as bisexual negates one’s individual choice in identity, and erases the subjective experiences of people who understand themselves to be entirely gay or straight.

There’s a myth out there that bisexual men are by definition incapable of monogamy. Do we have any data with which to respond?

The idea that bisexual men are incapable of monogamy comes from multiple places. First, there is the idea that all men, regardless of their sexuality, are incapable of monogamy. Masculinity, in our society, is tied to being hypersexual: the idea is that men always are, or should always be, ready for sex. This stereotype of hypersexual masculinity is compounded by the conception that bisexual individuals are even more sexually insatiable because their erotic potential is not limited by gender. There is an assumption that a bisexual person won’t be satisfied without having sexual relationships with both men and women.[14] [15] [16] Bisexual people are therefore seen as incapable of monogamy.[17] These ideas falsely limit the agency of bisexual men to have committed relationships.

Statistics on bisexual men’s relationship patterns are limited, and in particular we lack studies that separate “non-monogamy” (which is consensual, and may include polyamory or open relationships) and “infidelity” (cheating). Consistent with statistics collected in the 1990s, one more recent Australian study found that many bisexual men choose non-monogamy, by engaging in open relationships for example, while still having one primary relationship partner.[18] Sixty percent of bisexual men in this study had one primary relationship partner but negotiated open relationships, while 25 percent were in exclusive relationships. One way to interpret these findings is that 85 percent of the bisexual men in this study were in long-term and loving relationships with one partner, and many had developed ways of being in successful relationships without violating an expectation of monogamy. There is a great need for future research that explores these issues in diverse samples of bisexual men.

Unfortunately, not much research is conducted on relationship formation among bisexual men. We do know, from research on bisexual women, that infidelity may be linked to biphobia. One study found that bisexual women who were unfaithful were more likely to have more internalized biphobia.[19] We don’t have data on the reasons for, or prevalence of, bisexual men’s infidelity.

--Is there a correlation between bisexual identity and bisexual behavior? Is bisexual behavior more common than bisexual identity? Do we know what percentage of all men are bisexual?

Yes. From what we know, bisexual behavior is more common than bisexual identity. We have known for a while that one’s sexual identity doesn’t necessarily describe one’s sexual behavior. For example, lots of heterosexual-identified people engage in sexual activity with same-gender partners, but may not identify as bisexual for a number of reasons— perhaps they are more attracted to other-gender partners, perhaps the same-gender sexual behavior was situational, or sadly, perhaps they have internalized the stigma surrounding same-gender sexual attraction or bisexuality. People have many reasons for how they sexually identify, and behavior may not always be the most salient reason.

Some researchers estimate that 1.4% of men (ages 18 to 44 or 18 to 59) identify as bisexual.[20] This estimate comes from an analysis of studies conducted in the United States, but also internationally. In terms of differences between behavior and identity, one recent nationally representative study of sexual behavior in the United States found that among adult men, 4.2% identified as gay, and 2.6% identified as bisexual.[21] However, rates of same-sex sexual behavior reported in this study were much higher than 6.8%. Up to 14.9% of men reported having received oral sex from another man, and up to 10% reported previously performing oral sex on another man. Reports of engaging in receptive anal intercourse were between 9.5% and 10.8% depending on age. So, we know that plenty of men engage in sexual behavior with other men who may not necessarily identify as gay or bisexual.

Since the 1980s, the concept of the “down low” or “DL” man appears from time to time in the media advancing the idea that certain ethnicities are more bisexual than others. Is that the case and what is the relationship between the “down low” and bisexuality?

Although a proliferation of mass media has drawn attention to “the new down low phenomenon” (presumably “secretive” bisexuality among Black men) over the past few decades, relatively little scientific research has explored bisexual behavior and identity among ethnic minority men in the United States or elsewhere until recently. Although the study of bisexuality in Black, Latino and other ethnic minority men in the U.S. is significant in its own right, disproportionate rates of HIV/AIDS among these men make the current lack of scientific information even more urgent and concerning. From the very beginning, the popular construction of the “new down low phenomenon” has been fraught with complexities and contradictions. First, a clear and consistent definition of the “down Low” has been noticeably lacking. The term arose in African- American vernacular to describe any sort of “secretive” behavior. In the late 1990s, the term was heard in rhythm and blues songs as an indicator of male infidelity—as seen in R. Kelly’s 1996 hit, “Down Low (Nobody Has to Know).” The term also appeared in other forms of pop culture, primarily in Black male rap songs, as a marker of a man “keeping his business to himself.” The sudden ominous image of a “straight” Black man engaging in “secret” sexual activity with male partners was a relatively new and more limited characterization of the down low. Along with the construction of this phenomenon, men started to adopt “down low” (or “DL”) as an identity label, used, for instance, in self-descriptions in personal ads on the web, where DL indicates both a desire for privacy as well as serving as a marker of masculinity and sexual positioning.

Additionally, the recent construction of the “down low” has been yet another portrayal of bisexuality as a “new” concept, similar to Newsweek’s “discovery” of “Bisexual Chic: Anyone Goes” (1974) many years ago. Although the existence of male and female bisexuality has been well-documented across cultures since ancient times, the “down low” was portrayed as a new phenomenon. However, the cyclical erasure, stigmatization, re-erasure and re-stigmatization of bisexuality, particularly among men, is hardly “new.” As opposed to media depictions from recent decades, however, this time bisexuality was not exposed as a glamorous trend among pop stars and supermodels. Rather, it was a shameful “secret” which put innocent people (women in particular) at risk for disease and death. Indeed, the down low was suddenly exalted by some to the status of the “driving force” of the HIV epidemic in the Black community. Oprah Winfrey, in a highly publicized episode of her TV show, explicitly linked the down low phenomenon to HIV transmission, as did a panicked report in The New York Times Magazine.

Although down low men seem useful scapegoats for the disproportionally high prevalence rates of HIV among Black women, any direct empirical evidence regarding the role of the down low phenomenon in the HIV epidemic among African Americans was lacking. Also, research on Black male bisexuality and its associations with HIV transmission has not yet adequately described the complexity of these men’s sexual behaviors and associated risks, for themselves and their partners.

Last, current discourse surrounding the down low suddenly characterized “secretive bisexuality” as being all but exclusive to Black men. Interestingly, early studies of bisexuality in the U.S. focused heavily on White men and women. When acknowledged at all, early images of the potential role of a “bisexual bridge” from bisexual male to (presumably heterosexual and monogamous) female partners also promulgated the stereotype of the “white picket fence,” i.e., the White, married man as a vector of disease transmission. The public discourse on the Down Low in the mid-2000s brought with it an abrupt about-face in terms of racial/ethnic focus. This has resulted in renewed demonization not only of bisexuality but of Black male sexuality. In a scientific presentation shared at Indiana University in 2007, our close colleague Dr. David Malebranche summed it all up by saying, “(D)emonizing Black male sexuality has been a staple of American culture since slavery, where our role was to work and breed, and the Mandingo stereotype of a hyper-sexual Black man with an insatiable appetite for White women was created…we distort the truth about HIV in the Black community to divert our attention from the real ‘down low’ issues of oppression, racism, low self-esteem, sexual abuse, substance abuse, joblessness, hopelessness, and despair.” We explored these matters from scientific and theoretical perspectives in a special issue of the journal Archives of Sexual Behavior (2008) focusing on Black and Latino male bisexualities.

--In my Beyond Binaries workshop, I use a modified seven-point Kinsey Scale. Workshop participants are asked, “Where would you put yourself on this scale, overall?” Another question asks, “What identity words do you use to describe your sexual orientation?” What I see consistently is that people who identify as “bisexual” most often place themselves on one of the three middle numbers of the continuum and some self-identified bisexuals may be as high as five or as low as one on the continuum. “Straight” people usually cover the first three numbers, and “lesbian” and “gay” people the last three. That means that there is considerable overlap between the different identities, and that a “bisexual” person might be at the same point on the continuum as someone who identifies as lesbian, gay or straight and, in fact, might even be gayer than a “gay” person or straighter than a “straight” person. Is there any related research?

This question points to a key problem in comparing research on sexuality across studies; different researchers may make arbitrary divisions in this continuum, which other researchers may alter, incorporate or entirely disregard. There is no one standard scale for measuring sexuality, though the Kinsey Scale is the most widely recognized.[22] Typically, identity, behavior, and attraction are considered the main components of sexual orientation, but we lack all-encompassing tools to capture these concepts easily, especially when we acknowledge the change in these different dimensions over time. The Klein Sexual Orientation Grid measures additional dimensions of sexual orientation (including whom you feel emotionally close to, and whom your sexual fantasies involve).[23]

Importantly, the Klein Sexual Orientation Grid also includes time period (past, present and ideal). This way of assessing sexual orientation may be more comprehensive, but takes longer to complete and is not widely used. The differences in these two measurement tools also points back to the variability in how we understand orientation to begin with.

Another thing to consider is how two people who may have the same amount of same-gender attraction and same-gender sexual behavior might subjectively rate themselves in two different places on the scale because of the meaning they attach to their sexual feelings and experiences. Additionally, some measurements of sexuality look at same-gender sexual attraction and behavior relative to other-gender attraction and behavior (To whom are you mostly attracted? With whom do you mostly engage in sexual activity?). Therefore, two people may have the same amount of same-gender attraction and behavior, but one might have more other-gender attraction and behavior. If these two men both identify as bisexual, is one really “less” bisexual than the other because he experiences less other-gender attraction? By which dimension(s) will we measure how gay/straight/or bisexual someone really is? One must question the relevance of comparisons of sexuality across individuals, as this is not how most people think of their own identity.

I also see from the data provided in these workshops that there are many different identity words out there. Relevant to this book are pansexual, omnisexual, heteroflexible, homoflexible and fluid—which cover similar areas of the continuum as bisexual—and queer, which in my experience usually covers the five highest numbers on a seven-point sexuality continuum.

One of the reasons why we have seen a proliferation of sexual identity categories recently is because we have begun to recognize that sexuality isn’t a byproduct of a two-sex/gender system. The word bisexual—as it is most commonly understood—implies that a person is attracted to two (but not more than two) genders. But we know that there are more than two genders, and that there are a number of ways of doing gender. Therefore, some people who may have once identified as bisexual might choose to identify as something they perceive to be more inclusive (queer, pansexual, etc.), and others have re-defined the word bisexual in a way that does not assume a gender binary. As well, people whose sexual identity is not determined by the gender of their sexual partners now have a lot of freedom in determining which language best represents how they understand their own sexuality.

Because traditional sexual continuum scales place two sex/genders at opposite ends, some of these sexual identity categories which aren’t organized around partner sex/gender don’t fit anywhere on them (such as queer). Unfortunately, these sexual identity labels have yet to gain much traction when it comes to research, because there are so many potential categories and a large group is needed for any one of them to be statistically significant. A number of studies end up excluding participants who identify as something other than gay/lesbian, straight or bisexual, because there are too few. This is one reason why we don’t have good numbers when it comes to how many people actually identity within these categories. However, just because they might not be statistically meaningful, doesn’t mean they aren’t meaningful at all.

References

[1] Floyd, F. J., & Bakeman, R. (2006). Coming-out across the life course: Implications of age and historical context. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 35(3), 287-296.

[2] Savin-Williams, R. C., & Diamond, L. M. (2000). Sexual identity trajectories among sexual-minority youths: Gender comparisons. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 29(6), 607-627.

[3] Herdt, G., & Boxer, A. M. (1993). Children of horizons: How gay and lesbian teens are leading a new way out of the closet. Boston: Beacon Press.

[4] D’Augelli, A. R., & Hershberger, S. L. (1993). Lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth in community settings: Personal challenges and mental health problems. American Journal of Community Psychology, 21, 421-448.

[5] Rosario, M., Schrimshaw, E. W., Hunter, J., & Braun, L. (2006). Sexual identity development among lesbian, gay, and bisexual youths: Consistency and change over time. Journal of Sex Research, 43(1), 46- 58.

[6] Weinberg, M. S., Williams, C. J., & Pryor, D. W. (1995). Dual attraction: Understanding bisexuality. New York: Oxford University Press.

[7] Dodge, B., & Sandfort, T. G. M. (2007). A review of mental health research on bisexual individuals when compared to homosexual

and heterosexual individuals. In B. A. Firestein (Ed.) Becoming Visible: Counseling bisexuals across the lifespan (pp. 28-51). New York: Columbia University Press.

[8] Kinsey, A.C., Pomeroy, W.B., Martin, C.E., & Gebhard, P.H. (1953). Sexual behavior in the human female. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders.

Dodge, B., Schnarrs, P. W., Reece, M., Martinez, O., Goncalves, G., Malebranche, D., [9] Van Der Pol, B., Nix, R., & Fortenberry, J. D. (2013). Sexual behaviors and experiences among behaviorally bisexual men in the Midwestern United States. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 42(2), 247-256.

[10] Diamond, L. M. (2000). Sexual identity, attractions, and behavior among young sexual-minority women over a 2-year period. Developmental Psychology, 36(2), 241-250.

[11] Rosario, M., Schrimshaw, E. W., Hunter, J., & Braun, L. (2006). Sexual identity development among lesbian, gay, and bisexual youths: Consistency and change over time. Journal of Sex Research, 43(1), 46- 58.

[12] Clarke, V., & Turner, K. (2007). Clothes maketh the queer? Dress, appearance and the construction of lesbian, gay and bisexual identities. Feminism and Psychology, 17(2), 267-276.

[13] Hayfield, N., Clarke, V., Halliwell, E., & Malson, H. (2013). Visible lesbians and invisible bisexuals: Appearance and visual identities among bisexual women. Women’s Studies International Forum, 40, 172- 182.

[14] Rust, P. C. (2000). Bisexuality in the United States: A social science reader. New York: Columbia University Press.

[15] Rust, P. C. (1996). Monogamy and polyamory: Relationship issues for bisexuals. In B. A. Firestein (Ed.), Bisexuality: The psychology and politics of an invisible minority. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.

[16] Spalding, L.R., & Peplau, L.A. (1997) The unfaithful lover: Heterosexuals’ perceptions of bisexuals and their relationships. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21(4), 611-625.

[17] George, S. (1993). Women and bisexuality. London: Scarlet Press.

[18] McLean, K. (2004). Negotiating (non) monogamy: Bisexuality and intimate relationships. Journal of Bisexuality, 4(1-2), 83-97.

[19] Hoang, M., Holloway, J., & Mendoza, R. H. (2011). An empirical study into the relationship between bisexual identity congruence, internalized biphobia and infidelity among bisexual women. Journal of Bisexuality, 11(1), 23-38.

[20] Gates, G. J. (2011). How many people are lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender? The Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law 2011.

Available online: http://wiwp.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Gates-How-Many-People-LGBT-Apr-2011.pdf. Accessed 02/09/2014.

[21] Herbenick, D., Reece, M., Schick, V., Sanders, S. A., Dodge, B., & Fortenberry, J. D. (2010). Sexual Behavior in the United States: Results from a national probability sample of men and women ages 14–94. The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 7, 255-265.

[22] Dodge, B., Reece, M., & Gebhard, P. H. (2008). Kinsey and beyond: Past, present, and future considerations for research on male bisexuality. Journal of Bisexuality, 8(3/4), 177-191.

[23] Klein, F. (1978). The bisexual option. Binghamton, NY: Haworth Press.