14 Pages


M y response to this critical and cultural positioning of bisexuality has three main directions. First, I build on existing theoretical w ork on bisexual subjectivity that has begun to elaborate a set of epistemologies o f the fence rather than the more familiar closet. Jo Eadie and M aria Pramaggiore both use this term directly, although I am also thinking of Elizabeth D. Daumer, Am ber Ault, Ann Kaloski, M erl Storr, Steven Angelides, and M ariam Fraser as form ing an emerging trajectory of theorists concerned w ith form ation o f bisexual knowledges both historically and contem porarily.2 As I delineate in detail in chapter i , such approaches share my desire to rethink genealogies o f sexuality and gender via a central focus on bisexual knowledges, or knowledges about bisexuality. Second, and in the process of achieving this first aim, I redraw the map of contemporary feminist and queer studies from this perspective of bisexual knowledge. This process involves identifying bisexual meaning in key feminist and queer texts, thereby creating rather different textual associations than are produced by existing authors and theoretical schools. Instead of grouping together psychoanalytic queer texts, or feminist epistemologists, for example, I account for feminist and queer theorists in terms of which bisexual meanings they reproduce or generate

in order that their own texts might function in particular ways. Such an approach allows me to tease out threads o f bisexual knowledge where at first glance there might appear to be none. Too often, I w ant to argue, a particular text is said to ignore bisexuality, when in fact bisexuality is essential to that texts’ coherence.