1

So what exactly is the deal with the fence? You know, the one bisexuals are

supposedly sitting upon. The fence is a box, a border, a constraint. It is the you gotta pick a side in an imaginary metaphor that delineates a war against gay and straight, against girl and boy. You gotta pick a side; you cant be Switzerland (neutral bisexual), and you sure as hell cant be Puerto Rico, (unrecognized and of neither gender). When whittled down, it is not about the fence at all. The fence is only indicative of a larger system of oppressive binaries that attempts to explain vastly variant human sexuality in terms of simplistic dichotomies. Our pools of thought still consistently embrace such thinking. Models such as the Kinsey scale and Adrienne Richs lesbian continuum, though groundbreaking for their time, are problematic because they are too simplied in their scope of human sexuality and embrace dualistic thinking. I propose a new model for understanding erotic interactions without the binaries, focusing on describing the sexual capacities of contemporary humanity. I do this through rst examining Audre Lordes conception of the erotic and then by explaining my conception of bisexuality. I will argue that we must seek to dismantle the fences that box our conceptions in and resort instead to a free-range way of thinking. ! Words like erotic and intimacy often brings to mind steamy scenes of sexual

interaction, but the terms are too powerful to only apply to that type of human connection. Audre Lord describes the erotic in her inuential article, Uses of the Erotic: The Erotic as Power: The erotic functions for me in several ways, and the rst is in providing the power which comes from sharing deeply any pursuit with another person. The sharing of joy, whether physical, emotional, psychic, or intellectual,

forms a bridge between the sharers which can be the basis for understanding much of is not shared between them, and lessons the threat of their difference (56). This erotic joy can be shared between two or more people independent of their prescribed relationship with one another. The electricity of intimacy can surge between lovers, friends, co-workers, siblings, parents, children, roommates, and quite literally anybody in close contact with an individual. For example, three single mothers living together out of economic necessity can be in an intimate relationship, (not necessarily sexual) but serves as a loving, supportive environment in which to raise their children. Another good example is the increasingly popular bromance with which phrases like no homo are used to distinguish this intimate relationship from a sexual one. The importance is not in the type of relationship but in the emotions and human connection made in the exchange. ! Lorde writes that the erotic can be used as power in our existence, stating, For the erotic is not a question only of what we do; it is a question of how acutely and fully we can feel in the doing. Once we know the extent to which we are capable of feeling that sense of satisfaction and completion, we can then observe which of our various life endeavors brings us closest to that fullness (55). Many of our life endeavors are creating connections with others. Most people are intimately close to members of both genders and in this way, can be considered bisexual in the sense they have the capacity to have a strong bond between some men and some women. With my model, this is at the center.

Alfred Kinsey and his associates did groundbreaking work and were particularly

key in understanding bisexuality in terms of a seven-point scale, zero being exclusively heterosexual and six being exclusively homosexual. Kinseys results expressed that many people fall somewhere between the two numbers and some people were off the scale completely and delineated with an X for asexual. While revolutionary for its time, this model is problematic since it is not complex enough to distinguish between identity, desire and acts and because it refuses to acknowledge the intimacy that exists between people who are not lovers. Furthermore expressing asexual people with an X ostracizes them from the rest of humanity and is an inaccurate representation. ! The lesbian continuum developed by Adrienne Rich, however, fully illustrates

how erotic energy exists not merely in the sexual realm. She accurately points out, As the term lesbian has been held to limiting, clinical associations in its patriarchal denition, female friendship and comradeship have been set apart from the erotic, thus limiting the erotic itself (53). I agree when Rich asserts that the term lesbian has been limited but want to also suggest that her model contributes to the erasure of women who are not monosexually lesbian and also ignores the complexities of lesbian transgendered women. I believe that it is best to mark the continuum in terms of gender/ gender interaction rather than a term that carries considerable political weight. Rich later maintains The denial of reality and visibility to womens passion for women, womens choice of women as allies, life companions, and community, the forcing of such relationships into dissimulation and their disintegration under intense pressure have meant an incalculable loss to the power of all women to

change the social relations of the sexes, to liberate ourselves and each other (63). Adding to her argument, I believe this denial of reality and visibility is consummated for many individuals who are operating in the bottom half of hierarchies (gender, race, or disability, etc). We are also repeatedly denied recognition of having multiple intimate relationships despite the profound impact each one of them has on our lives; indeed, we are not even encouraged to consider them as intimate. ! Most of what I believe about sexuality evolved from my understanding of

bisexuality. Ive learned, as Julie Estep explains in Personal Perspectives on Bisexual Womens Friendships that, Experiences of bisexuality can be vastly different from one another, can change over time, and encompass intricate and widely divergent combinations of sexual behavior, desire, and identity (98). Bisexuals are in a unique vantage position since they are neither of the dominating constructions, heterosexual and homosexual, but a combination of the two. In Whats in a Name? Bisexual Women Dene Their Terms, a journal article written by Carol Berenson, it is conrmed that Instead of seeing bisexuality merely as the inclusion of both men and women in the realm of their possible attractions, bisexuality seemed to be more about a refusal to exclude. This subtle but important shift in emphasis was achieved through talk that constructed bisexuality as the removal of some sort of barrier or boundary (13). Bisexuality speaks in resistance to monosexual thinking and pinpoints that people risk losing parts of themselves if they try to t into these monosexual boxes, that one cannot be whole without recognizing all parts of their identity.

Later she brings this into question when she writes, At the same time that the

idea of bisexuality stands to challenge hegemonic dualistic thinking, the word itself unavoidably embraces the binary (15). I would like to argue that rather than necessarily embracing the binary, the term bisexuality merely draws attention to how western society sees gender only as a binary. As a word, it is symbolic since there are linguistic limitations when discussing sexuality; the language reects that we still dominantly think only in terms of male and female, ignoring intersex, transgender, people from cultures that have more than two genders, etc. ! Bisexuality stands to challenge that limitation by refusing to exclude based on

gender for intimate relationships. In this sense, I would like to entertain that many bisexuals can be pansexual as well, depending on the availability of intimate interactions with people who are neither male nor female. ! Many discussions rendering bisexuals invisible or treat bisexuality as a

transitional, childish phase are still dominant. Berenson points out While bisexual women see themselves as removing walls, dominate lesbian discourses insist that they are sitting atop them (14). But it is precisely these walls that must be deconstructed if the potentials of gender/gender interaction are to be explored. ! What if we had a model that addressed the multifarious nature of humans without

being trapped into traditional conceptions rooted in heteronormativity, monosexuality, and monogamy? ! To entertain a new model would mandate a consideration of the bisexual (and/or

pansexual) potential of every human being. There must also be an acceptance and recognition that not everyone exists in the binaries of gay or straight and female or

male, nor should they be expected to play the role society has granted for their orientation and gender. I say this with some hesitation because it has the potential to atten bisexual experiences, but I want to impress that if everyone indeed has the potential to be bisexual those experiences must be recognized as individualistic and bisexuality as diverse. Though anyone can claim bisexuality, I believe the term would be used by people are actually sexual with both genders and who understand that to be their sexual orientation. ! Understanding the erotic continuums requires a certain uidity of direction, an

acknowledgment that no one walks a straight line their entire life, nor interacts with merely one person but rather that an individual can take many directions and be erotically invested with many people in their search for fulllment. Nearly everyone exists on more than one continuum at different times in his or her life. Some relationships last, grow, or change and some fade or end. But all of them deserve to be recognized. ! To exemplify this in a model, I see each individual having an erotic compass with

which to explore life. Each specic, intense relationship they have with another individual is another trajectory, another continuum of their existence. People who are bisexual have the potential to interact with either gender (male or female) while those who are bisexual or pansexual have the capacity to follow trajectories that are gender variant. Though that renders the term bisexual to be a bit vague, the uidity is necessary for understanding the complexity of bisexual interactions. ! My compass serves as a sample to visualize some of the different possibilities

these paths could take depending on gender, culture, or geography. Similar to

bisexuality, my model gives no preference towards any one continuum, though I did put heterosexual and homosexual interaction at the north, south, east, and west locations on the compass to mark them as the directions most readily recognized. This new model doesnt distinguish between each continuum but rather allows all of them to exist together as an innite number of trajectories based solely on the gender of two people and the continuum of their erotic intimacy. ! There may be some unforeseen issues with my proposed model that I have not

yet considered, but recognizing the human potential to exist in a variety of trajectories is something Ive become erotically invested in, both in a intimate sense of my interactions and in the sense of empowerment through my passion in this subject. Audre Lorde insists, Recognizing the power of the erotic within our lives can give us the energy to pursue genuine change within our world, rather than merely settling for a shift of characters in the same weary drama (59). In this vein, I want to break the fences binding our thinking of sexuality that force limited understanding on the complexity of human interaction and propose something new. We must pursue recognition that each individual possesses an erotic compass and that the directions chosen are up to the person who seeks the journey.

Works Cited:

Berenson, Carol. "What's in a Name? Bisexual Women Dene Their Terms." Journal of Bisexuality. 2.2/3 (2002): 9. Women's Studies International. Web. 13 Feb. 2011. Estep, Julie. "Personal Perspectives on Bisexual Womens Friendships. Journal of Bisexuality. 6.3 (2006): 91-102. Women's Studies International. Web. 13 Feb. 2011. Lorde, Audre. Uses of the Erotic: The Erotic as Power. Sister Outsider: Essays and Speeches. Freedom, CA: Crossing Press, 1984. 53-59. Rich, Adrienne. Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence. Blood, Bread and Poetry: Selected Prose 1979-1985. New York: Norton: 1986.