This article was downloaded by: [190.224.138.

11]
On: 03 January 2014, At: 00:07
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954
Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,
UK

Journal of Bisexuality
Publication details, including instructions for
authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wjbi20

Toward a Newer Theory of

Sexuality: Terms, Titles, and
the Bitter Taste of Bisexuality
Jessica Leigh Zayla

University of San Diego School of Law , San Diego,

CA, USA
Published online: 19 May 2009.

To cite this article: Jessica Leigh Zayla (2009) Toward a Newer Theory of Sexuality:
Terms, Titles, and the Bitter Taste of Bisexuality, Journal of Bisexuality, 9:2, 109-123,
DOI: 10.1080/15299710902881467
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15299710902881467

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the
information (the Content) contained in the publications on our platform.
However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,
or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views
expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the
Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with
primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any
losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,
and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the
Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.
Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,

Downloaded by [190.224.138.11] at 00:07 03 January 2014

sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is

expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Journal of Bisexuality, 9: 109123, 2009

C Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
Copyright

ISSN: 1529-9716 print / 1529-9724 online
DOI: 10.1080/15299710902881467

TOWARD A NEWER THEORY OF SEXUALITY: TERMS,

TITLES, AND THE BITTER TASTE OF BISEXUALITY

Downloaded by [190.224.138.11] at 00:07 03 January 2014

Jessica Leigh Zayla

University of San Diego School of Law, San Diego, CA, USA

Beginning with a casual narrative, this work becomes a more complex

theoretical journey of sexuality and politics, using personal experience,
scrutiny, and analogy as vehicles of social critique. I argue that understanding sexuality as taste might fill in certain gaps that exist in current mainstream political debates over gay rights and that these gaps
are created and unexpectedly resolved by the same bisexual problematic.
Furthermore, I note that sexuality as taste is a theory that provides a basis from which to demand equal rights without straying into dangerous
realms of biological determinist absolutism.
Keywords: Sexuality, theory, feminism, lesbian, gay, queer, identity, civil rights

I remember sitting in my mothers house when I read a rare type of

article: a paper about bisexuality that was actually written by a bisexual
woman. At the time, I was in my early 20s, divorced, and in a very longdistance relationship with a French man, who was also bisexual. I had just
transferred from what many might deem a lowly junior college to a state
university anddue to nothing more than a convenient accidentenrolled
in my first womens studies class, U.S. Women of Color. The article on
bisexuality was a required reading for the womens studies course, and
I recall tears welling up as I flipped through the pages. This woman was
killing me softly, so to speak. Her story profoundly resonated with my own.
At this point in my life, I had been questioning my sexuality for
several years. But the most serious questioning began immediately after my
The author wishes to acknowledge Drs. Monica Lange and Eve Oishi, as well as Becky
Bailey.
Address correspondence to Jessica Leigh Zayla, 4162 Massachusetts Ave., La Mesa,
CA 91941 (E-mail: jzaylia@gmail.com).

Downloaded by [190.224.138.11] at 00:07 03 January 2014

110

JOURNAL OF BISEXUALITY

divorce. Did I want to date women at this stage in life? Could I move away
from the sexual rock star that I was with men to become sexually vulnerable
to new ventures with women? Although I desired to be romantically and
sexually involved with women, a couple of years passed before I made any
solid attempt.
I placed quotation marks around questioning above because, at that time,
I only internally wondered about sexuality in silence. My family, many of
my friends, as well as staff and faculty of schools that my brother and I
attended subscribed to a strict fundamentalist religious ideology that not
only disapproved of anything outside the rigidity of heterosexuality but
also openly rebuked any and all non-dominant sexual lifestyles.1 I made
a promise to myself that for the sake of my family, I would never date
women. Above all else, it would ruin my mother.
This, of course, was a promise I began to resent over time. The longing
to date women grew with each passing day, and I wondered whether I
was cheating myself out of potential happiness by continuing to date men
exclusively. Soon, I was promising myself something altogether different:
I would stop dating men entirely. It was the article on bisexuality that I
read for my womens studies class that turned mere internal questioning
into something more active. In reading, I felt like my desires made sense.
More importantly, I felt validated. This validation would not last long,
though, as I soon discovered the choppy waters of rejection from straight
and gay circles.
While in the long-distance relationship with Mr. France, I had my first
sexual experience with a woman. There were no lies, no strings; all was
open, free, and safe. After the first night with her, I once again felt validated.
I called my best friend to rejoice over discovering that I was not crazy, that
I really did like women.
Shortly afterward, I began writing rebuttals to homo- and bi-phobic articles in our campus newspaper. Because my writings openly reflected my
sexuality, I decided to come out to my brother. He and I had never kept any
aspect of our lives hidden from one another, and I certainly did not want
to continue closeting myself from him. We were well acquainted with the
oppression of the same fundamentalist religion and had cancelled our membership in it years before in our own ways: Comfortingly, he supported me.
Then came the parent question. Are you going to tell Mom? Surely, it
had to be done. Although I had not exactly planned on how I would come
out to my mother, let alone when to do it, I soon learned that apparently
the right time to come out to ones parent(s) is never in the midst of an
already heated argument.
You could walk through that door and tell me anything else, and Id
take it better than this! You could tell me youre a lesbian! You could even
tell me youre bisexualId be more disappointed, but you could!

Jessica Leigh Zayla

111

Now, imagine. Stupid me thought Mom was hinting . . . that this was
her wacky way of informing me that she knew . . . that she had known all
along, so why didnt I just come right out and confess. Well.

Downloaded by [190.224.138.11] at 00:07 03 January 2014

Well what?!
Well, fine. Im bisexual.
[Silence.]
There is a somewhat popular saying that I feel applies to that silence:
When you assume, you make an ass out of you and me. My assumption
of Moms supposed hinting could not have been further from the mark.
Recalling this moment, I often wonder why it was worse in my mothers
eyes for me to be a bisexual woman than a lesbian. As it turns out, I have
encountered many individuals (gay, straight, lesbian, and otherwise queer)
who similarly feel that bisexuals constitute a more problematic sexuality
demographic. Is this because of a disease factor? Is it the stereotypes? The
myths . . . the uncertainty . . . the distrust . . . the fabled inability or failure
to commit . . . the malleability . . . the supposed political softness . . . the
presumed perpetual state of confusion . . . the ambiguity . . . the biological
challenge. . .?
Prominent scholar on bisexuality and psychiatrist Klein (1993) tackled
the issue of bisexuals being seen as worse than gays and lesbians in the
first chapter of his book, The Bisexual Option. Gays view bisexuals as spies
and traitors (Klein, p. 7). Shame and judgment attached to coming out as
bisexual, as opposed to gay or lesbian, are not things that I alone dealt with
but hold true for many, individuals and couples alike.
Disappointingly, some lesbians in my very own womens studies program turned out to condemn bisexuality as equally as my mother had and as
Klein described. For instance, when I went on a date with a queer-identified
woman (Ill call her Tina) from my department (which is generally a bad
idea), she ridiculed my sexuality. Although queer identified, she made it a
point never to date men, which led me to wonder why she did not simply
choose to identify as a lesbian. That night, after a couple of drinks, she
looked me directly in the eyes and declared, As my roommate always
says, just say bye-bye to bi girls. I was devastated, even mildly traumatized. I did not understand how a supposed feminist could be so dreadfully
judgmental, insensitive, and spiteful. First came hurt. Then came anger,
which provided excellent motivation for research. So thats precisely what
I did. For my up-and-coming undergraduate research paper, I wrote about
straight and gay womens stereotyping of bisexual women.
On one hand, most of what I read I had already experienced. Lesbians
view bisexual women as sirens because they lure the apparently helpless
lesbian into an abode of lust and illusions of love untilpoof!they

Downloaded by [190.224.138.11] at 00:07 03 January 2014

112

JOURNAL OF BISEXUALITY

vanish into the arms of the next available Joe, who they bring home to
their families and with whom they procure boundless heterosexual social
privileges. Tina humorously confirmed this particular stereotype. Yes!
Thats you! Youre a siren!
On the other hand, many bisexual scholars pushed for the term bisexual to be counted and treated as a completely separate sexuality category/demographic. These scholars argued that bi-s are neither gay nor
straight, and because of this, bisexuals need to consider themselves as
something altogether different. I wonder, however, how wise of a strategy
is this? Should bisexuals not band with members of lesbian and gay communities for political purposes? After all, it seems that the more people on
the bandwagon for equal rights, the better that would be for all of us.
When lesbians and gays acquire rights that they are presently denied, it
will automatically ensure bisexuals access to those same rights, a notion
with which Klein (1993) would likely agree (p. 167). In this sense, in
a political sense, I will explore ways in which the title bisexual works
as a benefit and a detriment to the individual as well as to the lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender (LGBT) community.

DISCUSSION
The Pseudobisexual Porn Star
I must admit that the term itselfbisexualand labeling myself as such
always made me feel uncomfortable. I did not care for the way it sounded
and had a particular distaste for the way it felt. For whatever reason, I felt
somehow untrue to my very being when I told people I was bisexual, yet
I was not lying. I lacked adequate words to explain my experiences and,
moreover, my sexuality, so for simplicitys sake, in conversation, I referred
to myself as bisexual. It was all I knew.
Such linguistic limitations did not arise from my family and community
as much as they did from the very limited choices presented in society.
Perhaps the media, with all of its sexual schizophrenia, added to my angst.
Girls Gone Wild videos and pornography that depicts apparently straight
young women making out and/or having sex with other women, work to
create and perpetuate stereotypical misconceptions about bisexual women.
This is especially frustrating because the overwhelming majority of such
visuals are produced and orchestrated by straight men, for straight men.
Indeed, the sex displayed is straight sex, even if performed by two women.
With voyeuristic positioning and scenarios, and with the directed glance
into the eye of the camera, these are straight mens fantasies . . . straight

Downloaded by [190.224.138.11] at 00:07 03 January 2014

Jessica Leigh Zayla

113

mens ideas of how women do or should have sex with other women; it
must be for their (straight male) pleasure.
Bergers work (1972) reflected similar contentions in Ways of Seeing,
which concerned the male/phallocentric gaze in post-Renaissance European art. In his book, Berger (1972) discusses the gaze, in that women see
ourselves as being watched by men and as men see us.2
Orkins photograph, American Girl in Italy (1951), which depicts a
sidewalk full of gawking men, visually captures Bergers gaze theory
well. Mens eyes fixate on a white American woman as she briskly walks
across a street, away from them. Her own stare does not make contact with
any mans eyes. Rather, she concentrates downward on the space directly
in front of her. And although, due to an absence of actual physical eye
contact, she does not literally see the surrounding men watching her, she
nevertheless sees what is occurring. The woman knows how those men are
looking; through their gaze, jeers, and apparent whistling, the American
girl sees herself as the men see her. She is acutely aware of their view at
that time, in that space.
Bergers theory of the phallocentric gaze (1972) also applies to the use of
womens bodies and sexualities in relation to pseudobisexuality generated
in pornography. Men are the owners of the gaze as they produce the material
in which women are gazed upon. Men posture bisexual women as open
to titillating lesbian fun, available to voyeurs who desire to partake in the
action, and accessible for this taking. Berger (1972) wrote, the image of
the woman is designed to flatter him [man] (p. 64). Pornographers exploit
the image of bisexual women for mens heterosexual fantasy actualization.
Men expect the supposed bisexual women to be just lesbian enough for
straight sex without the threat of pure lesbianism, which excludes men
entirely. Hence, the imagery of bisexual women in pornography is quite
literally designed to flatter straight male desires.
Not so conversely, when women watch, we also see through phallocentric eyes; we come to understand ourselves through the manners in which
we are presented and perceived. MacKinnon (1997) questioned these perceptions and the assumptions behind what is considered real sex. She
argued that pornography itself is sex because it is a medium, the medium,
through which sex is defined (MacKinnon, 1997). Pornography identifies
heterosexuality, homosexuality, and bisexuality in our society. More significantly, pornography naturalizes and normalizes violence against women
as real sex (MacKinnon, 1997), which is disconcerting, to say the very
least, because pornographers utilization of seemingly bisexual women as
ever-accessible not only misleads, but also invites, absolves and approves
of rape against these women under the guise of sexiness and sex. Furthermore, pornographers present pseudobisexual women in pornography as
wanting the straight male invasion.

Downloaded by [190.224.138.11] at 00:07 03 January 2014

114

JOURNAL OF BISEXUALITY

When I used to tell men I was bisexual, most smirked with a gleaming
look of hope for a threesome. Some even solicited such sexual performances from me. I felt that my experiences with women were diminished
to straight male sexual/pornographic frenzies. Slapped with pop-culture
slurs such as bi-curious and hetero-flexible from men and lesbians
alike, I felt cheated and misunderstood. Although men took me for a toy,
women would not take me at all simply because I labeled myself as bisexual, not lesbian. When I dated men, my lesbian friends called me fraud
and wannabe. When I dated women, my mother would exclaim in frustration, What are you? First youre bisexual. Then youre a lesbian! Will
the real Jessica please stand up? How unfair that the real Jessica rests
upon who she dates or with whom she sleeps, as if those individuals make
up who I am. What a sad and reducing notion.
After all, what (if anything) is it to be lesbian or bisexual? In casual
conversations, some declare that if a lesbian has ever had sex with a man
or if a straight woman has ever been intimate with another woman, she is
bisexual. Some assert that sexuality has everything to do with where ones
emotions lie (e.g., if a woman falls in love with women, she is a lesbian),
whereas others swear that sexuality relies on physical attraction or the
ability to become sexually aroused by a person of a particular sex/gender.3
On a safer note, some insist that each person has the right to label herself
or himself however she or he sees fit.
These issues are complex, multilayered, and thus, difficult to confront.
To observe the fluidity of sexuality, all one needs to do is to ask a handful of
people to define bisexuality. The variety of responses will likely lead one
to realize that labels, terms, and titlesnot only concerning bisexuality but
also sexuality in generalare limiting and, at times, downright fictitious.
Sexuality, whether as a lesbian, gay man, bisexual, queer, or straight
has multiple meanings and is fluid. Many theorists, medical practitioners,
politicians, people of faith, mainstream commentators, and lay individuals
maintain rigorously opposing views on the topic of sexuality. In conventional academic literature, however, these discussions predominantly tend
to focus on gay versus straightfalsely dichotomistdiscourse. Yet it
is the complicated and often dismissed issue of bisexuality that causes
biologically-based arguments regarding sexual orientation to plummet.
Freud (1905), as many know, believed that all individuals are born
bisexual. However, in proper process of our Oedipus complexes, we
evolve into straight boys and girls. Realizing that this is a crude synopsis of
Freuds work, and though much of psychoanalysis is founded on phallocentrism, Freuds idea that each of us is born with the capacity to either love or
be attracted to individuals regardless of sex/gender provides us with a line
of scrutiny from which we can move forward. For, we should understand
this capacity as a tabula rasa of sexuality.4 Although, perhaps initially, this

Jessica Leigh Zayla

115

might seem like a theoretically dangerous place to head, the implications

here are not necessarily as concretely sociological as one may guess.

Downloaded by [190.224.138.11] at 00:07 03 January 2014

The Bisexual Problematic

While my tattoo artist, Brian, was in the midst of etching my latest design
into my shoulder blade, he asked me a typical, yet sincere, so-youre-gay
question. I know its none of my business [he was right], but if you dont
mind me asking [which I didnt], when did you know you were gay?
I struggled with this for a long time.
Brians question threw me off-guard for a moment, and I could not help
but think, Goodness. If I enjoy being with women, does that mean Im
gay? If I ever enjoyed being with men, does that mean Im bi? If I am
either, then why havent I known this within my intrinsic self throughout
my life? I secretly envied many lesbian and gay friends who claimed to
know from early ages and stages. I speculated about my own authenticity
as a woman who loved being with women.
To say that I am anything, especially sexually, is certainly to follow the
mainstream gay rights framework, which is to say that I am born one way
or another. This approach, however, limits as well as debilitates. Ignoring
choice not only marginalizes bisexuals but also preemptively dismisses a
fabulous opportunity to shift the mainstream argument so that lesbians and
gays may demand rights on our own terms, rather than on the argumentation
tactics, language, and style of homophobic straight politics.
Illustrating the homophobia of heterosexist politics is the fruitless search
for nonexistent gay gene.5 For, are there any biologists equally as fervent in
the hunt for the straight gene? Of course not, but this relies on heterosexist
assumptions. This society generally presumes that people are born straight
because of the assumed naturalness of heterosexuality. To be born gay, then,
is to be genetically mutated,6 according to heterosexist biological suppositions. To complicate this issue, there exists no search for the bi gene.
When politics and biology become muddled, as is the case in sexuality
gene searching, perhaps a discussion on the politics of self-labeling is
appropriate to flesh out why the searchthe biological or genetic certainty
of a social labelmatters to so many on gay and straight sides of the
sexuality coin. Butler (1997) addressed concerns vis-`a-vis the politics of
labeling oneself lesbian or gay in her well-known article, Imitation
and Gender Insubordination. Maintaining that each of us performs all
aspects of gender and sexuality, within and under rigid definitions, Butler
(1997) expresses that the mere idea of an individual performing a particular
role does not necessarily mean that the relative role is fake per se. Rather,
she inferred that playing and performing are mechanisms by which we

Downloaded by [190.224.138.11] at 00:07 03 January 2014

116

JOURNAL OF BISEXUALITY

carry out our roles or identities. In this sense, we are all in drag and doing
drag continuously, and Butler (1997) expressly emphasizes the drag, and
hence unnaturalness, of heterosexuality. Yes, straight people do drag, too;
they perform every bit as much if not more so than gays, especially if
they desire to separate themselves visually from the gay community out of
homophobia. From the clothes we all wear to the words we speak, from
our gestures to countless identity signifiers, we choose and perform so that
the world around us will have an idea of who we are . . . or will they?
Butler (1997) expanded her theory from performance to identity. Terms
that identify our sexuality entail both flaws and usefulness. Although terms
are highly limiting and insufficientoften too simple for the complex nature of the I (Butler, 1997), we nevertheless need to identify ourselves,
particularly for political purposes, if we wish to achieve gender and sexuality equality.
This specific point helped me understand why I felt so uncomfortable
with bisexual as a title for myself. To me, I am me, a pseudoautonomous
human being attached with various demographics because in this time,
space and location, social constructs of abstractions carry with them concrete consequences. In other words, it is through sanctions, limitations,
love, hate, acceptance, discrimination, rejection, rights (or a lack thereof),
etc. that abstractions of certain social constructions (such as race, gender,
and sexual preference) develop into social realities. I was too complex of
an individual to blurb out Im bisexual contently. Not only did I feel
reduced to my sexual preferences, but I never sensed that I was born queer.
Sadly, though, from my honest reflections arose harsh ramifications of
judgment, especially, I feel, from the gay community.
Bisexuality, due to its seemingly overt unnaturalness, poses biological
and, thus, political problems for gay communities. Because heterosexual
culture is dominant and, therefore, holds the political power of U.S. society, it also controls access to granting and denying rights. In turn, the
gay community has often campaigned for equal rights via heterosexist
premises, which not only maintain heterosexual dominance by declaring
straight rights as real rightsthe goals to be obtained7but also by accepting the heterosexist premise that straight = normal = natural = born
as such = under God = the way things are supposed to be. To gain rights,
the gay community has argued from the same widely-accepted heterosexist premise of naturalness for the naturalness of gayness, in that we are
inherently gay: gay = normal = natural = born as such (at this juncture,
some will assert that they have been created/born gay under God, whereas
others stop here).
Often, I have heard self-defined lesbians and gay men express, Believe
me, if I could choose not to be gay, I would, in an attempt to convince
dominant heterosexual forces of the innateness of their situation. These

Downloaded by [190.224.138.11] at 00:07 03 January 2014

Jessica Leigh Zayla

117

remarks, however, always sadden and disappoint me. I cannot help but
think of white filmmaker, John Stahl, in his film, Imitation of Life (1934),
wherein he makes the gross assumption that Black women, if given a
choice, would prefer whiteness. Critics mistakenly hallowed this film for
its racial progressiveness, as it invited viewers to feel sorry for Black
women; after all, they are born Black and cannot help it. Such a skewed
and chauvinistic viewpoint discounts the more realistic option that Black
women would choose Blackness. They would likely opt to change societys
racism, not Blackness. A history of slavery and discrimination, not Blackness. Ignorance, rape and murder, not Blackness. Similarly, why does the
gay community fight for rights from lines of weakness depicted in Stahls
film, as if to say, Dont blame us! We cant help it! We wouldnt choose to
be born gay.? Should queer persons, if given a choice, choose straightness?
If so, why? Sure, it might make our political and social lives easier, but
should we not preferably elect to change societies views to gain political
equality as opposed to changing ourselves? Discrimination, not gayness.
Ignorance, hate, and irrational fear, not gayness. Legislation, not gayness.8
The bisexual community is typically embedded within the larger gay
community. I, personally, am not familiar with any strictly bisexual community, and Klein (1993) noted that bisexuals have no solid need for
purely bisexual communities because bisexuals may flow freely between
gay and straight communities (pp. 107133). Kleins assertion, of course,
is arguable. However, in my experience, Kleins observations seem practically accurate. Typically, in a group of ten or twenty queers, I would know
maybe onetops, twobisexual individuals. To say the very least, in such
an environment, it is difficult to engage in a were born this way political
debate with members of gay communities.
Bisexuality, subtly as well as overtly, is a demographic of sexual choice
since bi-s can swing either way or go both ways, (which might clarify
why much of the barely existent literature on bisexuality by bisexuals calls
for the formulation of a separate entityan exclusive group with altogether
different political agendas; most bisexuals would probably resist fencesitting characterizations like those aforementioned). Bisexuals are neither
straight nor gay. This frustrates members of the gay community (in a very
general sense; not all lesbians/gays feel this way) because they feel that
bisexuals have neither taken a stance nor accepted their true selves as either
gay or straight. Bisexuals are then seen as privileged swingers, traitors,
and/or self-loathing persons (Klein, 1993), which may create internalized
homo- or biphobia (Horney, 1932).
If lesbians and gays are fighting for rights based on unproven biological
phenomenathat we are born gay, we are cornering ourselves into having
to wait for the discovery of a nonexistent gay gene before we can demand equal rights. Because no such gene has been discovered, right-wing

Downloaded by [190.224.138.11] at 00:07 03 January 2014

118

JOURNAL OF BISEXUALITY

ultraconservative groups have declared victory on the blogosphere in that

gays simply do not deserve equal rights. The argument goes something
like this: Since there is no proof that the gay gene exists, gays were not
really born gay as they have claimed, and therefore, we may justifiably
deny those deviants of equal civil rights. However, we do not have to
continue on the debilitating road of argumentation of homophobic persons
by pushing the notion that we are born one way or the other. Indeed, influential homophobic members of society have exposed the fatal flaw of
the born-this-way stance that the gay community has clung to for decades
all over the Internet,9 especially after Californias disappointing passage of
Proposition 8 in the 2008 electionan official ban on same-sex marriage
via state constitution amendment. There exists a far more empowering,
healthier, and nonheterosexist way to fight for gay rights through a theoretical mechanism that I have coined the bisexual problematic.
Bisexuals biological ambiguity creates politically problematic unrest
for LGBT rights. Bisexuality distresses the gay community because it
brings with it a controversial notion that one can and does choose the
gender of ones sexual partners. Such a notion seems politically dangerous because, if one chooses to be with a member of the same sex, he or
she consequently chooses his or her own oppression (according to dominant heterosexist thought). Those who choose their own oppression do not
deserve equal rights because they have purposefully rejected a social and
biological norm.10 However, it is precisely this trendthe bisexual biological/political schismthat unlocks possibilities for foundational theoretical
bases of rights for members of all sexualities.
Spinach and Chocolate
Imagine for a moment that sexuality is like food. We have many tastes
for many things, and these tastes/preferences/pallets differ from individual
to individual. Although nobody can fully express all of the intricacies
behind the matrix of taste, surely much of our tastes are rooted in our
culturesthe foods and types of preparations with which we have been
raised. Nevertheless, not all of us who have been raised on walnuts or
oranges enjoy these foods. One cannot explain why one despises the taste
of walnuts; he or she simply does.
Remaining on this analogous journey, let us say that of the multitudes
of food as sexuality, of the many combinations and possibilities, that heterosexuality is spinach. Now, I like spinach. In fact, I rather enjoy spinach,
but there are those who do not feel as I do, who might even hold a harsh
aversion toward spinach. Still, let us suppose that from the time of our
infancies, we were overwhelming subjected to spinach cartoons, clothing,

Downloaded by [190.224.138.11] at 00:07 03 January 2014

Jessica Leigh Zayla

119

advertisements, bedtime stories, songs, etc. Eating spinach is recognized

as the only way to truly eat; it is the only real food. Additionally, let
us say that this spinach-o -heterosexuality is deemed good and authentic
if and only if prepared in one limiting fashion: steamed. To spice things
up, one may switch leaf brands or steam for longer or shorter periods
of timethere is some flexibility within the narrow confines of steamed
spinach-defined sexuality.
Step into this world for a moment and suppose furthermore that lesbianism or gayness is chocolate and that you were consistently informed
throughout your lifetime not only that spinach is the way to go but also
that chocolate is bad. Now, perhaps you have always had a fondness for
chocolate with or without disgust of spinach. Maybe it is the aroma you
tend toward. After smelling and curiosity win out, you try your first bite of
chocolate, and before you know it, you are a chocolate eater. If you enjoy
it, you are a chocolate lover! Scandalous. You now have a decision on
your hands: hide from your family and friends about your chocolate eating,
or come out to them. Once out, people burden you with inquisitions. So,
when did you first realize you were a chocolate-eater? You might reply,
Well, thats easy. One day, I tried it, and I liked it, or You know, ever
since I was X-years old, I was always drawn to chocolate . . .
This figurative dialogue could spin off in many directions, but if sexuality
was framed as a matter of taste, some thoughts should jump to mind relative
to spinach and chocolate. First, it would not be absurd for one to enjoy
both (though probably mostly on separate occasions . . . but, then again,
maybe not; who knows?). Second, there are many approaches to preparing
spinach (besides steamed!) and chocolate (besides plain chocolate bark!).
Third, countless foods exist in the world besides spinach and chocolate!
You and I should not be limited to one or the other simply because those
are the only two options available.
The point here is that because there exist myriad sexualities and ways
to experience sexualityjust as there are seemingly limitless types and
combinations of foodsa theory of sexuality as taste provides an analogy that clearly acknowledges, and in fact encourages, tastes, choices, and
preferences without failing those who feel that their tastes have been predetermined. Just as we cannot explain why John Doe has never cared for
apples even though raised on an orchard, we similarly cannot explain why
Jane Doe has never cared for men. And she should not have to. Drawing
from the search for the gay gene, it is equally absurd to imagine geneticists
embarking on a biological hunt for the hates-apples gene.11
Sexuality as taste includes many factors that other theories ignore. One
of these factors is the acknowledgment of uncertainty. Instead of socially
and politically dangerous blanket statements that purport that sexuality is
always innate or always choice, sexuality as taste admits that though many

Downloaded by [190.224.138.11] at 00:07 03 January 2014

120

JOURNAL OF BISEXUALITY

of us may choose (though we may not know it, or are unwilling to admit it
to ourselves) who we prefer to date, be intimate with, marry, and so on (as
Butler, 1997, would remind us, this choice, of course, refers also to straight
individuals), and though many of our tastes and desires are connected to
our culture or socialization, some of our tastes can be explained neither
socially nor biologically.
Sexuality as taste holds political significance because we all must have
legal and social rights to choose our partners according to our tastes (bisexual, lesbian, gay, straight, or otherwise) as long as our choices (1) do not
inflict harm,12 (2) do not impose upon others choices, and (3) do not rely
on anothers inability to choose (e.g., in cases of incapacitated individuals
or children). After all, one may have a taste for human flesh, but murder
is axiomatically regarded as wrong as cannibalism is taboo, so one would
have to go about enjoying other foods. The same can be said for sex with
children or incapacitated persons. However, there are many ways in which
one can enjoy sexuality apart from the above conditions, which many of
us do without inflicting harm, imposing upon others choices, or relying
on others inability to choose.
CONCLUSION
There are problems with proposing a sexuality-as-taste theory. For instance,
realistically, nobody is going to be offended if I eat chocolate or spinach
(though some might with meat). Sexuality is deeper and more complex
than lappetit. Overall, however, the inclusion of sexuality as taste may
help us embrace choices, ambiguities, preferences, and tendencies, and it
might aid in fairer politics as far as social and civil liberties are concerned.
Human beings (among nearly limitless other species) are sexual. To be
born human is to eventually develop into a sexual adult with a variety
of sexual tastes, which is precisely what bisexuals reflect. We are selling
ourselves short by insisting that we are born gay, bi, or even straight
for that matter. We are doing ourselves an alarming disservice by appropriating dominant heterosexist rhetoric to explain our sexualities within
the limitations of naturalness or innateness.13 The important point to take
away is that we are all sexual, ergo human, beings.
Still, bisexuals are distinct from straights because, like lesbians and gays,
they deviate from dominant heterosexist norms and mores. Unfortunately,
deviation is seen as deviance, and the gay movement resists bisexuality
due to its potentially threatening political implications. Hence, bisexuals
do not fit in, not only because of their potential for enjoying heterosexual
privileges but also because of choice. Bisexuals put choice and preference
(as opposed to orientation) out in the open as a real probability. Bisexuality

Downloaded by [190.224.138.11] at 00:07 03 January 2014

Jessica Leigh Zayla

121

leaves a bitter cultural and political taste in the proverbial mouths of gays as
well as straights because mainstream society and politics have been duped
into believing and arguing in a dangerously downward-spiral fervor that one
is undoubtedly born a certain way, in either/orstraight/gaydichotomist
frameworks. This has been ass-u-me-d by straight culture and adopted and
perpetuated by gay culture.14
The bisexual problematic can be used as an analytical tool with which all
nonstraights can approach equality politics in a different, far less hindering
fashion. Straight adults are socially, politically, and legally permitted to act
on their tastes with other consenting, willing, and wanting adults with similar tastes. If we argue from this line, understanding it as a basis for the rights
of heterosexual individuals, then lesbians, bisexuals, gays, and queers can
demand rights on the same groundsof sexuality as tastewithout resorting to the limitations (and sometimes falsities) of extreme and absolutist
stances.

NOTES
1. In fairness, my mother and father did not openly discuss homosexuality as much as other members
of my family (e.g., aunts, grandparents, etc.), friends, and the congregation of our church did.
Nevertheless, our lives were inundated with homophobic speech and doctrine, particularly because
we attended religious schools.
2. Feminists have addressed the gaze since Berger (1972), expanding on heterosexist, white, privileged, and elitist gazes, among others. See bell hooks, for example, in her works on the oppositional
gaze in film.
3. I use sex/gender here because of the variance in contemporary discussions concerning topics of
both sex-as-biology and gender-as-social-construct. I acknowledge that sex-as-biology needs to
include intersexes, whereas subcategories of gender-as-social-construct can overlap, intersect or
remain mutually exclusive depending on history, interpretation, culture and location, among other
factors (see Intersex Society of North America [2008]. Our Mission, Retrieved March 31, 2009,
from www.isna.org).
4. Horney (1932), who was arguably the first prominent psychoanalytic feminist, would probably
agree with Freud that sexuality is, at first, a clean slate. However, she, like Freud, would also
move to discuss how women and men resolve their Oedipus complexes in terms that seem at once
homophobic and ignorant of bisexuality. Many scholars hold Horneys work dear in queer theory,
but I reject psychoanalysis almost entirely for its misogyny and homophobic roots. At any rate,
psychoanalysis has no bearing on political strategy for the LGBT community in the United States.
Accordingly, I have chosen to relegate anything beyond mere mention of the topic to a footnote.
5. For elaborate, yet homophobic and hateful, treatment of the nonexistence of the gay gene, see
Harrub, Thompson, and Miller (2003). Articles like the one at TrueOrgin.org are precisely why we
should argue for equal rights under a new, stronger and more comprehensive theory, and wholly
reject our decades-long use of the heterosexist lines of argumentation (described in detail below)
for equal rights.
6. Technically, mutations occur at around 1%, not 10%the approximate percentage of gay people.
However, I use the term mutation here as a metaphor that might work at a subconscious, if not
blatant, level.

Downloaded by [190.224.138.11] at 00:07 03 January 2014

122

JOURNAL OF BISEXUALITY

7. This is not to say that those in LGBT communities intentionally uphold or cherish straightness. For
instance, instead of criticizing governmental support and sanction of straight marriage, mainstream
gay communities have been advocating for gay marriage. Yet, to be equal to any dominant group
is to validate their ways and goals, perpetuating their ideologies as true, right and real. Realizing
the unpopularity of this, I strongly acknowledge that if straight marriage is legal, backed, and
sanctioned by the government, then by any and all means, so must gay marriage. Simultaneously,
though, we must analyze, critique, and challenge the connections between marriage and the state,
paying particularly close attention to language, rhetoric, and jargon. For example, former President
George W. Bush, along with many other politicians, has expressed on numerous occasions that
marriage is a sacred union between a man and a woman. Rather than taking a reactionary
position by claiming how gay marriage is or could be sacred, we must analyze and challenge
the meanings of that term. What is it to be sacred? Does sacred mean under God? If this is so, we
must insist on the separation of church and state by proclaiming the irrelevance of sacredness in
any government-backed institution.
8. Although Black history is chalked with hate and murder to the degree that white gays will never
understand, I posit that the type of hate and ignorance in racism and homophobia is the same in
that it comes from the same place of the dominant dominating those in the out-group to maintain
in-group power.
9. For an example of such reasoning, as flawed as it may be, see Carr, F. W. (2008). Why Blacks
Dont Like Gays. Retrieved March 31, 2009, from http://www.lasentinel.net/Why-Blacks-Don-tLike-Gays.html.
10. Such are rights found in straight marriages, including tax benefits, spousal hospital visitations,
automatic power of attorney, and automatic inheritances as next-of-kin, among others. Of course,
gay persons may indeed acquire these privileges if they choose to marry someone of the opposite
sex, as homophobic persons all-too-readily point out. So, although one may argue that marriage
rights are not withheld from gays, they most certainly are if one desires to marry another of the
same sex. The right to marry is meaningless if we cannot marry the adult of our choosing. Recall
antimiscegenation lawsthe ban on interracial marriages between whites and non-whites. Before
the Supreme Court found that the ban was unconstitutional in 1967, some similarly argued that
individuals rights to marry were not restricted, so long as whites married whites and non-whites
married non-whites. However, marriage rights obviously were limited because the existence of
the condition necessarily limits. See Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967) for the Supreme Courts
landmark case holding antimiscegenation laws unconstitutional.
11. One of my former professors brothers is a gay biologist, who has been searching for the gay gene
for years. Members of the gay community find his research threatening because once the gay gene
is discovered, they fear that the government will use the information to perform genetic genocide
against gay persons. Conversely, he responds that finding the gay gene will guarantee civil rights
for the LGBT community because that would undeniably prove that gay people are born gay, so
they cannot help but be gay; somehow immutability is supposed to safeguard homosexuality just
like race and sex. Although interesting, such assertions are very problematic. Queerness could be
treated as a mutation. Unless a straight gene is found, society will still assume that straightness is
normal and natural; any deviation will continue to be viewed as abnormal and unnatural. Even if
scientists successfully discover a straight gene, society would probably nevertheless continue to
consider straightness normal and gayness as some sort of genetic mutation. Further, as the overarching argument in this article points out, bisexuality all but destroys pure biologically-grounded
arguments that would explain sexuality. Although some may feel that they are born bisexual, others
clearly choose bisexuality. That choice, as an option, smacks biological innateness in its face.
12. I am referring mostly to physical, sexual, social and psychological harm as opposed to moral
harm, realizing the possible Pandoras Box here, which requires an entirely separate work.
13. Even so, what is naturalness? If we consider observations in the animal kingdom as evidence of
nature, we find gay and bisexual activity in many species. Take bonobos, for instance. These

Jessica Leigh Zayla

123

primates, cousins of the chimpanzee, settle disputes with sex. Bonobos rub their genitals with the
genitals of other bonobos, irrespective of the recipients sex. Females have sex with females and
males, and males have sex with males and females.
14. I would like to make very clear that I, personally, do not necessarily think that the majority of
dominant straight culture believes that gay people are born gay. In fact, I feel that the opposite is
more likely true. When heterosexuals allege that homosexuality is a choice, they solidify their rights
in the ass-u-me-d naturalness of their own sexual tastes and choices because they can denounce
gay persons choices as deviant and, hence, deserving of unequal treatment. I am critiquing, rather,
popular LGBT responses to such assertions and arguing that instead of adopting the born-thisway rights framework, we must challenge the tastes and choices of straight individuals as a less
limiting way of demanding rights.

Downloaded by [190.224.138.11] at 00:07 03 January 2014

REFERENCES
Berger, J. (1972). Ways of seeing. London: BBC/Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Butler, J. (1997). Imitation and gender insubordination. In L. Nicholson (Ed.), The
second wave: A reader in feminist theory (pp. 307320). New York: Routledge.
Freud, S. (1997). Dora: An analysis of a case of hysteria/Sigmund Freud; with an
introduction by the editor, Philip Rieff. P. Rieff (Ed.): New York: Simon & Schuster.
(Original work published 1905)
Harrub, B., Thompson, B., & Miller, D. (2003). This is the way God made me: A
scientific examination of homosexuality and the gay gene. Retrieved March 31,
2009, from www.trueorigin.org/gaygene01.asp.
Horney, K. (2000). On the manifestations of repressed female homosexuality. In
B. J. Paris (Ed.), The unknown Karen Horney (pp. 6976). New Haven, CT: Yale
University Press. (Original work published 1932)
Klein, F. (1993). The bisexual option. New York: Hawthorn Press.
MacKinnon, C. A. (1997). Sexuality. In L. Nicholson (Ed.), The second wave: A reader
in feminist theory (pp. 158180). New York: Routledge.
Orkin, R. (1951). American girl in Italy [photograph].