Oct 18 2008
Gay Politics vs. Bisexual Politics
In these politically charged times, particularly with the US presidential elections just a few weeks away. I thought I’d write something explaining my take on the differences between gay and bisexual politics and possibly add some insights into why the gay community exists as a political movement, whereas bisexuals don’t even seem to have a community, much less an organised political movement.
I’m a liberal and I personally find my sexuality is very much aligned with my politics. However, I can’t help but notice that gay activism is very much rooted in the socialist movement. The UK Labour Party has the largest gay membership of any UK Political party and the TUC (Trade Union Congress) works very hard supporting LGBT workers, however their remit only included bisexual and transsexual workers from 1998.
For the benefit of US readers who confuse socialism with liberalism, I can split the difference very suscintly: Socialism emphasises collectivism, whereas liberalism emphasises individuality.
Herein, is the main distinction between being gay and bisexual. When you come out as Gay, you instantly belong to a community. The Gay Community. References to “the LGBT community” which I frequently make myself, are little more than an acknowledgement that politically, we occasionally share common ground (EG: Gay marriage), but bisexuals frequently don’t exist within or as part of a wider gay, lesbian or transsexual community.
I know I don’t. I move in very straight circles. Which frustrates me to a certain extent because it makes it rather hard to meet men. But can I cross-over to the gay community? Not really. It feels very alien to me, there’s too much emphasis in gay circles and the gay media on fitting a stereotype, on conformity within the community. Are you a bear or are you a twink? If you are a twink what’s your twink code? Do you like Disco or Pop Musicals? Theatre goer or drag act fan?
Whichever way you look, the gay media is projecting an image of how the ideal gay ought to be. This shared identity, although not universal, gives the gay community power as a political force. Just as the socialist movement emphasises the shared values of worker rights, and your duty as a worker to stand together under the banner of the proletariat, the gay media emphasises the “right way to be gay”.
There seems to be little room for individuality and self-expression in either movement. Homosexuality doesn’t naturally celebrate diversity, its the lesbian, bisexual and transsexual folk who’ve allowed the gay community to claim that distinction under the LGBT banner. Equally socialism and trade unionism doesn’t celebrate diversity, instead preferring to lump us together as the proletariat. “The masses against the classes,” (to quote the Manic Street Preachers.) Where is my identity celebrated within all that?
I’m the son of a working class parents made good, my parents ran their own businesses for as long as I’ve been alive and although I no longer speak to my father, its never occurred to me that I would ever work for anyone other than myself. I cannot identify with the socialist mentality of being entitled to a “job for life” any more than I can identify with the gay media ideal that I should shave my (light) body hair and start watching musicals or dance to Disco.
I want a place where I can celebrate my individuality and feel accepted for being different without anyone else judging me. That I think in essence is why most bisexuals feel more comfortable identifying with liberal politics. Especially when you consider that after 11 years in power the Labour Government in the UK is now suffering from the plight of a party that’s been in power too long, namely that you can’t admit anything is wrong without laying the blame at your own feet. Worst they are giving out a lot of signals which seem to be saying, “We accept your views as long as *we* share your opinion.” The Conservative opposition, also seems quite happy to back the majority consensus. Hence they now support gay-rights having long opposed them.
But only liberals stand-up for the real minorities. Its only liberals who say “I don’t care what you are or what you do, as long you don’t hurt anyone else.” (Or as I once articulated at a party where I’d had a little too much to drink: “Do what you like, just don’t be a cunt!”)
This belief, known as the harm-principal, is the cornerstone of Liberalism. It gives everyone the space to be themselves, without fear of prejudice, or requirement to conform to society’s expectations. And this I think is its appeal to bisexuals, who like me don’t really fit into the gay community and find the straight world uncomfortably homophobic and sexually unfulfilling.
Liberalism is the natural home for anyone who values their own identity above conformity to someone else’s ideals. This is not to say that all bisexuals are liberals, or all gays are socialists, but the gay community has been built on solidarity, as was the socialism movement. Whereas bisexuality revolves around the individuals own, often private, form of self-identification. This emphasis on oneself, on our own personal and individual right to be ourselves rather than the need or responsibility to be part of a wider community is what distinguishes liberals from both socialists and conservatives.
It also explains why an organised bisexual movement hasn’t developed in the same way as it has for the gay community. We’re frankly far to diverse to come together under a single banner
If you enjoyed this post. Please share it with others by adding it to the following social bookmarking sites. This is greatly appreciated and doesn't go unnoticed. Just click the graphics below.
13 Responses to “Gay Politics vs. Bisexual Politics”
Leave a Reply
Please write in good English, using correct spelling, punctuation and grammar. Please also capitalise your sentences correctly.
The SHIFT key is your friend.
I quite frankly love your article! I totally agree that bisexuals are quite liberal in their own lives. I at least know that I am quite liberal when it comes to most things and I value diversity around me just as much as anything else. I therefore would like to applaud your article and say I am right with you in your opinions.
Touche, as usual. I think a lot of people consider bisexuality to be a sort of secondary identity: first, I am liberal; then, I am bisexual.
Thanks for the post. I enjoyed it and found myself largely in agreement. One quibble I have is your assertion that it is liberals who are embody the harm principle. That has not been my experience. In the American political ecosystem I have seen liberals be more prescriptive about social norms than conservatives. The only real embodiment of the harm principle are the libertarians, who bring their own baggage.
best,
jm
Hi John
Actually your point is probably the result of the American mislabelling of “social democrats” as “liberals”.
A “liberal” is somewhere in between a social democrat and a libertarian.
Here’s a span of political ideologies across the political spectrum:
Communist> Democratic Socialist > Social Democrat > Social Liberal> Liberal > Libertarian > Anarchist.
Note the absence of Conservatives? That’s because they don’t fit on this axis of the political spectrum. In fact as conservatism isn’t an ideological political movement, its difficult to plot them anywhere (I can explain separately if you are interested.)
Unlike social democracy, liberalism supports equality of opportunity, and not equality of outcome, preferring a meritocracy instead. Liberalism also has a distrust of monopolies, both public and private, which puts it at odds with libertarianism who believe in a wholly unregulated economy and with social democrats who might be inclined to nationalise industries.
Most assuredly, I was speaking from the American political perspective where the spectrum looks like socialist –> liberal –> moderate –> conservative –> libertarian. It is an inelegant and self-serving division of the political spectrum. Note that social democrat doesn’t appear. And the oddest thing is that liberal and conservative are opposed. Most of the labels of American politic are an Orwellian nightmare where Humpty Dumpty rules the day.
jm
One thing I notice about any major conservative political party in any modern democracy, be it the Republican Party in the US the Conservatives in Great Britain or Partido Popular in Spain. There is no single shared ideology amongst the membership. No single belief that unifies the party.
Conservatism isn’t a political ideology or movement, that’s not what its about. Conservatism is about holding the popular line and maintaining mass appeal. When popular opinion shifts so do ‘conservative’ policies. Conservatism just represents opposition to whatever progressive idea on the table today. Its a protest against change.
The only time conservatism radically changed the world was when both Thatcher and Reagan simultaneously embraced a 150 year old liberal concept known as Free Trade. However, their failure to apply the liberal harm principal to economic policy meant they created behemoth corporate monopolies, who in turn thanked for making them so rich by funding their campaigns, and thus conservatism became tied to big business.
You are getting into a problem I have had. You worry too much about what other people want you to be or what you perceive everyone else to be (putting all gay men in a box). If you get out there, you will find many people (especially in the Gay Community) who do not fit your description. My problem is that my straight friends are anti-gay. I love both straight and gay people and their is little or no difference in the straight and gay people that I love except for who they choose to sleep with. I am positive you could find some Gays in Britain that are just like you. While our Gays tend to align with our Liberal Party (who could be described as slightly more socialist than our Conservative Party), this is based on the Liberal Party’s pro-Gay views. The real confusion is that you are using the classical term of Liberal (Classical Liberalism). This term has been replaced by Libertarianism in the US. We are not confused between the two. It is just that there is such a small number of Libertarians that they do not have a chance to win any elections. While some Americans will not admit it, we favor parties that help all American citizens. Libertarians and Classical Liberals to me are like Anarchists except that they want a strong national defence…How in the hell do you get a strong military without much government and low taxes??? I’m afraid in todays world this just doesn’t work. But my advice to you is to just let go of this mentality. You are likely wrong about your assumptions. I do this same thing all the time. I have an idea of what women want and how they are and therefore refuse to date them even though I prefer them sexually and emotionally. You have an idea of how gay guys are and may or may not prefer men or women, but it is obviously keeping you from something you want since you say that it is keeping you from meeting men. You would have loved the two men I just dated. One of them wanted to be straight except for the bedroom and one of them was a Libertarian believing that if you’re poor you’re shit out of luck, but it ain’t his problem.
Libertarians are a bit too close to anarchists for my liking. And I explained the left-right spectrum in a previous comment.
Communist> Democratic Socialist > Social Democrat > Social Liberal> Liberal > Libertarian > Anarchist
In the US the Democractic Party includes Social Democrats and Social Liberals. Yet u tag them all as “liberals” and when you use the word in the US you mean “far-left wing”.
A genuine liberal however, will have a fairly moderate view of economic issues, wealthfare etc. Being equally sceptical of state controlled monopolies as much as a corporate monsters. American’s don’t tend to forget such people exist because there are no parties in your county representing them. Though they do make up a significant proportion of what you call “independent voters”.
But for the record…
This article was an observation on the politics associated with the gay community and gay activism. It is not intended to be a judgement or presumption of individual political persuasions.
I wonder if you could share what your source or reasoning is for the claim here that the Labour party has the largest gay membership. Given that the Labour party probably has about 4 times the membership of the Lib Dems they may indeed have the edge in numbers but it would be hard to call. The published membership figures of the LGBT wings of each suggest the Libs may actually have the lead in raw numbers as well as almost certainly having the lead in percentage terms thanks to the two parties comparative records on LGBT issues.
The commonality of voting liberal and being out as bi – picking a third option twice as it were – does show up strongly in eg surveys of people who go to BiCon. But then BiCon does attract a disproportionately well-educated demographic, which also is the demographic most likely to vote gold rather than red or blue. There may be a lot of chicken-or-the-egg there!
Hi Jen
If I could remember the source I would gladly share it, I really should have noted it down in the article. I probably read it on-line, so the information would be linkable. I’ll certainly look try to it up, though I wouldn’t be surprised if my source turns out to be several years out of date.
If you have access to more recent figures, please share them and I’ll amend the article.
For the record the reasoning is almost certainly based on raw numbers and not proportion of membership, in the context it wouldn’t be meaningful to talk in terms of which party had the largest proportion of gay members, as the focus of the article was where do gay vs bisexual people tend to align themselves on the political spectrum. Though we must be careful not to assume that people always vote for the party that offers the best support for their sexuality. Often other issues and policies draw LGBT people towards a political party, we are not single issue voters.
That said this was not the purpose of the article to link sexuality with a political party, but more to explore my theory of a link between sexuality and political ideology. I have along the way linked political parties to political ideologies, but don’t think that just because I’ve done that, I’m saying Gay is Labour, Bisexual is Liberal Democrat. That would be simplistic and would be inferring too much.
Loved your article! Just thought i would point out that in the UK while their isn’t any offical orginization as such there are movements towards trying to build one. Bicon has already been mentioned and there are numerous smaller Bifests held around the country to try to promote awarness as well as offer support and be a social event etc. I believe the next one is Brighton Bifest…
An often unsung hero of this is the publication Bi Community News. Which trys to cover many important issues to bisexuals, unfortunetly it is thus far only a paper publication as it depends primarily on donations to keep going. As there is still much confusion in mainstream politics as to just what bi issues are specifically and why they can’t just be lumped under gay issues, it has yet to be able to access the funding it deserves. I deeply wish i could see it in glossy glory alongside ‘Attitude’ or ‘Diva’ or with the distribution of ‘the Pink Paper’ but it feel we are a ways of from that yet.
I believe many issues arise from parties scewing the point slightly. Take Liberal Democrat’s ‘Homophobia is Gay’ button badge campaign launched last year.
On the face of it, it would appear to be a humourous and effective way of combating homophobia in our schools.
However, i would point out that while the intension is good, it is still allowing ‘gay’ to be used in a negative context and this is what needs to be addressed. I remember when i was at school and it was acceptable at the time to call someone you thought was stupid a ‘spastic’ a term which is not tolerated any more and is greeted with disgust if it is.
Anyway, those are my thoughts i apolagise for straying from the central point.
It drives me crazy that everyone assumes the the left is the only party that could possible bring gays equal rights. Not true. Libertarians (and some old-school Republicans) believe in limited government, and the freedom of each individual to live life however they please as long as it does not harm another individual. As such, they believe in equal civil rights for all, and thus equal rights for gays including marriage.
Sidenote:
It bothers me that a group advocating acceptance tends to be so closed minded regarding politics. While it hasn’t occurred on this forum, so often individuals in the gay community assume everyone who is gay is left on the political spectrum, or that everyone who is not is ignorant and closed minded. I mean, not all of us are fiscally liberal.
Alyssa
I think your post comes from the general American misunderstanding of the term “liberal”.
I refer you back to my earlier post:
http://www.bitheway.co.uk/2008/10/18/gay-politics-vs-bisexual-politics/#comment-1148
There is also always confusion around the term “fiscally liberal”.
A liberal economic policy is essentially a laissez-faire approach, which you would probably today associate more with the Republican Party. Lower taxes, less regulation, free trade etc.
However, the American Right has smeared the word liberal so badly that they have essentially inverted the terms so that “fiscal conservative” means classic liberal economics and “fiscal liberal” means leftist economics. Honestly I feel like smacking you guys sometimes… Why did you have to take the name of a perfectly sound and well thought out political philosophy and use it to refer to Socialists?
Actually I know the answer: The Christian Right saw an opening to associate progressive though with leftist economic policy and exploit America’s fear of communism. This is why in the US the word liberal remains a borderline insult.