Introduction to the Special Section on Bisexual Health: Can You See Us Now?
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Archives of Sexual Behavior https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-018-1370-9 SPECIAL SECTION: BISEXUAL HEALTH Introduction to the Special Section on Bisexual Health: Can You See Us Now? Wendy B. Bostwick1 · Brian Dodge2 Received: 26 November 2018 / Accepted: 1 December 2018 © Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018 Abstract Despite comprising the largest proportion of the “lesbian, gay, and bisexual” population, research focusing on the unique health concerns and needs of bisexual individuals is relatively scarce. While health disparities are increasingly well documented among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender individuals relative to their heterosexual and cisgender counterparts, gaps remain in our basic understanding of how health status, behaviors, and outcomes vary within these groups, especially bisexual individuals. The lack of specifed research on bisexual health is even more curious given that, when separated from both heterosexual and gay/lesbian indi- viduals, bisexual individuals consistently report higher rates of a wide range of negative health outcomes, including mood and anxiety disorders, substance use, suicidality, as well as disparities related to healthcare access and utilization. Indeed, in scientifc research, mass media, and in public health interventions, bisexual individuals remain relatively invisible. This Special Section represents an efort to shed light on a new generation of quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods research studies that examine health-related concerns, outcomes, and intervention opportunities specifcally among diverse samples of bisexual individuals from a variety of social and cultural contexts. The research herein focuses on intersections of multiple identities, the development of new measures, the use of large national data sets, and diverse groups of self-identifed bisexual men (who tend to be least visible in health research). Findings from these studies will signifcantly advance our knowledge of factors associated with health disparities, as well as health and well-being more generally, among bisexual individuals and will help to inform directions for future health promotion research and intervention eforts. Keywords Bisexuality · Bisexual health · Sexual orientation · Sexual identity · LGBT · Sexual and gender minority (SGM) Introduction This publication had far-reaching impact, including the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD) Preface classifying sexual and gender minority (SGM) individuals as a health disparity population. According to the NIH, “(s)exual Can You See Us Now? and gender minority” is an umbrella term that encompasses lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender populations as well as Eight years ago, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) published a those whose sexual orientation, gender identity and expressions, landmark report “to evaluate current knowledge of the health or reproductive development varies from traditional, societal, status of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) popula- cultural, or physiological norms (Alexander, Parker, & Schwetz, tions; to identify research gaps and opportunities; and to outline 2016). The IOM report also acknowledged, “(w)hile LGBT a research agenda to help the National Institutes of Health (NIH) populations often are combined as a single entity for research focus its research in this area” (Institute of Medicine, 2011). and advocacy purposes, each is a distinct population group with its own specifc health needs.” * Wendy B. Bostwick Despite this substantial progress, there is one domain that [email protected] has changed little in the ensuing years—that is the lack of atten- tion to and acknowledgement of bisexual persons as a distinct 1 Department of Health Systems Science, College of Nursing, group under the “LGBT” umbrella. Many scientifc journal University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL 60612, USA special issues and reports that supposedly focus on “LGBT 2 Center for Sexual Health Promotion, Indiana University, health” lack a single piece about bisexual-identifed populations Bloomington, IN, USA Vol.:(0123456789)1 3 Archives of Sexual Behavior specifcally. With the exception of sexual risk behaviors, bisex- sing-along to a group of children with the lyrics, “sometimes ual men and women are often relegated to the background or men love women, sometimes men love men, and then there are treated as an afterthought in most current scientifc and advo- bisexuals, though some just say they’re kidding themselves” cacy discussions of “LGBT health.” (Lembeck, 1996). And it was certainly not in the 2000s when What makes this especially concerning is the mounting sensationalizing, even demonizing, portrayals of Black behav- body of evidence that points to pronounced physical, mental, iorally bisexual men “on the Down Low (DL)” exploded on and other health disparities among bisexual groups, above and the Oprah Winfrey Show (King, 2004), and subsequently in beyond those experienced by lesbian and gay groups (Bostwick, botched public health eforts (Malebranche, 2008). Characteri- Boyd, Hughes, & McCabe, 2010; Conron, Mimiaga, & Landers, zations of Black men “on the DL” presented them as preda- 2010; Dodge et al., 2016; Feinstein & Dyar, 2017; Helms & tory vectors of disease transmission whose lack of disclosure Waters, 2016; Herek, 2002; Roberts, Horne, & Hoyt, 2015). of same-sex behavior was due to deception and “internalized Despite this pattern of uniformly poor health outcomes among homophobia,” rather than taking into account the real-life bisexual populations, research on sexual minority groups often contexts and consequences of such disclosure in this previ- forgoes meaningful distinctions between the health and life ously ignored population (Dodge, Jefries, & Sandfort, 2008). experiences of bisexual and gay/lesbian groups. This is espe- Indeed, this hysteria led to a cottage industry of self-help books cially true for bisexual-identifed men, who, outside of the realm and resources meant to educate women on “how to know if of HIV/AIDS, have received little to no study and are often your partner is on the DL,” and how to strategically evacuate treated as merely an extension of gay men e.g., “gay/bisexual such relationships (Browder & Hunter, 2005). men” (Sandfort & Dodge, 2008). Consequently, we have yet to identify those factors that account for health disparities among Bisexuality Is Not New bisexual individuals specifcally. Although the 2011 IOM report on LGBT health empha- Is our moment now? Can you see us now? If not, why not? sized the pressing need for more health research on bisexual Bisexuality is certainly not new. Although the existence of persons, the feld of bisexual health research has remained bisexuality has been well documented across cultures since (perhaps not surprisingly) relatively invisible. While social and antiquity (Cantarella, 1992), scientifc and media endeavors behavioral health research has fourished on numerous other aimed at “proving the existence of bisexuality” have cycli- sexual minority topics—including “gay marriage,” “gay-iden- cally repeated themselves over recent decades (Carey, 2005; tity development,” and increasingly positive societal attitudes Denizet-Lewis, 2014). Research on the existence of bisexual toward “homosexuality” (or “gays and lesbians”), research behavior and identity is not uncharted territory. Alfred Kinsey’s remains relatively limited on the health and lives of bisexual pioneering sexuality research at Indiana University showed that, people, especially at the intersections of diverse racial/ethnic, in addition to exclusively heterosexual and exclusively homo- socioeconomic, gender minority, and other cultural factors sexual individuals, substantial numbers of men and women in (Dodge et al., 2016). the U.S. reported sexual attractions and involvement with indi- With all this in mind, the question emerges—when is our viduals of more than one gender (Kinsey, Pomeroy, & Martin, moment of recognition, of intervention, perhaps even of cel- 1948; Kinsey, Pomeroy, Martin, & Gebhard, 1953). While the ebration? When will bisexual people and populations be seen, term “bisexual” itself has only come into common usage as a and be seen as something other than a “new trend” or “lying” sexual orientation and identity label in the early- to mid-twenti- (Carey, 2005)? It was not in the 1970s, with an infamous New eth century (Angelides, 2001), the existence of individuals who York Times article in which bisexuality was trivialized as a new are attracted to, engage in sexual behavior with, and love other and glamorous trend among Studio 54 supermodels and David individuals regardless of gender has likely been with us since Bowie (may his bisexual soul rest in peace) (“Bisexual Chic: the dawn of time. Anyone Goes,” 1974). It was not in the 1980s, at the dawn And, yes, fuidity in attractions and desires has spilled over of the HIV epidemic, when the Centers for Disease Control into fuidity of diverse labels and defnitions. Thus, you will and Prevention portrayed this so-called “bridge population” fnd terms including bisexual, bisexual+, bi+, queer, non- as spreading HIV from “closeted” bisexual men to their pre- monosexual, pansexual, “mostly gay,” and “mostly straight” sumably monogamous, heterosexual female partners (Doll, in contemporary popular culture and research, including some Myers, Kennedy, & Allman, 1997; McKirnan, Stokes, Doll, & of the work presented in this Special Section. Again, these var- Burzette,