Has anyone ever researched the sociology/psychology of it in comparison to the “one-drop rule”? It seems like calling someone “really gay” when they’re bisexual is similar in that being gay is viewed a kind of “contamination”, like race, and in both cases it’s the contamination/deviation from the norm which determines the identity of the individual.
Of course, in the broader culture male bisexuality is more often reduced to being gay and female bisexuality to being straight. And in some LGBT/queer circles, people can be accused of being “really straight” if they’re bisexual. The latter would fit the “contamination” theory (it’s just that the expectation is of same-sex relationships as the norm/ideal), but the problem of erasing female bisexuality doesn’t fit as directly. I’m sure it has something to do with denying female sexual agency, the objectification of lesbian relationships for male consumption, and etc.
Anyway, just wondering if this has been looked at somewhere.
Yeah, I should have used Google Scholar before posting:
Brekhus, Wayne H. 1996. “Social Marking and the Mental Coloring of Identity:
Sexual Identity Construction and Maintenance in the United States. ”Sociological Forum 11(3):497-522.
Brekhus, Wayne H. 2003. Peacocks, Chameleons, Centaurs: Gay Suburbia
andthe Grammar of Social Identity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.