World AIDS Day is upon us (December 1st), and will kick off AIDS Awareness Month; as such, I decided to take a look at how bisexuality has played out in the history of the epidemic, and how we are faring today as a community. What I found instead is that, though there have been professional reports written on region-specific bisexuals and their risk for contracting HIV, there was no comprehensive overview of how bisexuals have affected and fared in the history of the epidemic. In considering why this was the case, it became apparent that, though bisexuals are becoming more visible and more politically active (apparently Bisexuality Day is September 23rd, but I never got the memo), a central core to our community is still lacking.

I began by doing a survey of available HIV infection statistics. The newest report of HIV incidence in the United States was released by the Center for Disease Control (CDC) in August this year, and though the statistics appear to be grim, the numbers have risen due to an improvement in methodology and available technology. The percentage breakdown is still similar to what some of us are already familiar with: men who have sex with other men (bi or otherwise) still account for most new HIV infections at 53%, high risk heterosexual contact is at 31%, injection drug use (IDU) is at 12%, and 4% of new infections occurred in men who have sex with men as well as actively use injection drugs. The results are similar to those in the 2006 incidence report: MSM 50%, high risk heterosexual contact 33%, IDU 13%, MSM IDU 3%. The concern here is that very little bi-specific data exists, and as such it may present significant challenges in educating our community and in devising better methods of prevention.

The area I wanted to explore next was the common accusation that bisexuals (bi men in particular) were responsible for bringing HIV into the straight community. After poring through materials mainly aimed at supporting and educating individuals who might be questioning their sexuality, I found that there are mentions of this common bi stigma, but nothing was affecting or interacting with my current view of the situation: if bisexual men did indeed bring HIV to the heterosexual community (a claim that is dubious and unfounded, at best), it was the result of a severe lack of information and educational efforts at the beginning of the AIDS epidemic, and of the overall oppressive atmosphere in America toward the entire LGBTQ community.

It is unproductive to blame members of a subjugated minority instead of addressing the real cause, which is, if it can all be distilled into one word, homophobia. Or maybe: Reagan. It was encouraging to see support material directed at young bisexuals or newly identified individuals, but again, here I found that save for a few bisexual-centered websites, most other materials were available on inclusive LGT sites.

My next stop was a survey of some bi-centric or bi-related publications at the 17th International AIDS Conference, which was held this year in Mexico City. Here, bisexuality was mentioned in the abstracts, but it was not separated from the more general MSM umbrella. Some studies in the 90s and early 2000s do focus on bisexual behavior, but their relevance is dated or so region-specific that it excludes other geographic populations in its risk assessment or proposed prevention programs. Now, I am no doctor, nor am I an epidemiologist, so I can only guess that having more bi-specific research into risk assessment and prevention can be more helpful, or at least provide different modes of analyzing the behavior of our population and therefore tackle the epidemic more efficiently. But I was once again struck by the idea that for bisexuals’ existence as a community is inextricably tied to that of the greater LGBTQ crowd, and though it is perhaps beginning to find its own queer space, for now we are still lacking a strong central core.

What is the point in all this?  Well, I can tell you what isn’t the point first. I am not advocating some sort of nutty separatist movement where bisexuals sever themselves from their LGTQ brothers and sisters because we most certainly have common political goals, nor am I putting down or deeming irrelevant the efforts at a community core that already exist (Dr. Fritz Klein’s books, The American Institute of Bisexuality, The Bisexual Resource Center, and biMagazine). I’m simply calling attention to how thin our resources are, and how sporadic our community appears to be.  At the last Queer Conference hosted by UNCA, there was only one paper presented on bisexuality; nationwide, there are no solid statistics on bi-identified men and women and HIV; though bi-ness and its stigmas are addressed in support materials, there were few bi-centric websites that were comprehensive, well documented, expansive, and thorough; and bisexuality is so elusive that I fear HIV risk teaching materials haven’t found our community as successfully as they have others.

Aside from the organizations I’ve mentioned above, there are few others that cater specifically to bisexual issues, which as far as resources go, pales in comparison to what the gay and the lesbian communities have established separate from each other. Certainly LGBTQ organizations strive to be inclusive, but bisexuals haven’t seemed to coalesce to the degree that gays and lesbians have. Perhaps this is yet another cost of the lack of visibility and the outright negation by some members of the gay and straight community, but if this is to be fixed, it can’t start anywhere but from within. We must establish a well-organized network of everything from scholarship, to bi-specific activism that is as prolific, rigorous, and vital as the many LGTQ organizations that exist today.

I cannot stress enough that this isn’t a call for separation, but instead a call for more action, more organization, and more visibility. While I certainly encourage that bi folk continue to participate in the existing greater LGBTQ community on our shared journey to equality, I also hope that we can become a more solidified community unto ourselves; it is paramount to the continued development of our multifaceted identities, as well as to our health.