In the imagination of the far-right, bisexuality is a symptom of the so-called sexual degeneracy of Western women, and functions as a gateway into other “progressive” or “anti-family” beliefs. On forums, in Telegram or Signal channels, private Facebook groups and on Instagram pages, bisexuality is discussed far less frequently than trans people (discussions about trans people are almost incessant in far-right spaces, given the current culture war around trans identity. These discussions feed both into and off of the Trump administration’s attacks on trans rights), but mentions were still present enough to surprise me during my research.
The most common way that bisexuality is mentioned or discussed is as a misogynistic shorthand to indicate that a woman is promiscuous, untrustworthy or degenerate. Bisexual men do not exist in the far-right imagination, and most mentions of bisexuality are bi-misogynistic.
To further this, bisexuality is associated with instability, impermanence and frivolity, which, to the far-right, are weak characteristics that are associated with women. In contrast, men and masculinity are characterized as being stable, strong and unchanging. Bisexuality simply does not fit into this.
A common meme format in online far-right spaces compares “modern/progressive” women to “traditional” women. The modern woman is often depicted as being in a bigger body, with tight-fitting and revealing clothes, brightly coloured dyed hair and body modifications. Around her, there are descriptions of who she is as a person, which usually include things like “owns multiple cats,” “on her fifth abortion,” “thinks casual sex is empowering” and, invariably, she is described as either bisexual or pansexual. Often, there is often mention of this archetype having sex with Black men or having biracial children. Sometimes her sexuality isn’t mentioned at all, but I never saw the progressive archetype being described as straight or a lesbian. She is only ever bi, pan or unlabelled. In contrast, the “traditional” woman is depicted as slender, with long, natural-coloured hair, wearing modest clothing. She is usually described as “loving God,” “being submissive,” “recognizing the sanctity of life” and having white babies. She’s also either described as straight (or sometimes “understanding God’s design for men and women”), or her sexuality is not mentioned, which is intended to suggest that she is “normal” (i.e., straight).
The “progressive” women’s bisexuality is also often coupled with mentions of her having had abortions. In this way, her sexual orientation is used to hammer home how dangerously promiscuous modern women have become. It is implied that without male oversight, women are inherently so sexual that they will not limit themselves to proper sexual propriety—like sleeping with one gender—and will engage in race-mixing and abortion. Her sexual fluidity is used to suggest that women’s sexuality and bodily autonomy need to be controlled by men. The “traditional” woman is not just straight, she is submissive to men— as conservatives think she should be.
