Hubbry Logo
Bi-curiousBi-curiousMain
Open search
Bi-curious
Community hub
Bi-curious
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Bi-curious
Bi-curious
Bi-curious
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Sexual orientation
Sexual orientations
Related terms
Research
Non-human animals
Related topics
Part of a series on
LGBTQ people
      
Sexual orientation and gender
History
General
Identities
Culture
Rights
Health
Societal attitudes
Issues
Academic fields and discourse
LGBTQ portal
Bi-curious flag

Bi-curious (also bicurious) is a term for a person, usually someone who is a self-identified heterosexual, who is curious or open about engaging in sexual activity with a person whose sex differs from that of their usual sexual partners.[1][2][3] The term is sometimes used to describe a broad continuum of sexual orientation between heterosexuality and bisexuality.[4] Such continuums include mostly heterosexual or mostly homosexual, but these can be self-identified without identifying as bisexual.[5][6]

The terms heteroflexible and homoflexible are mainly applied to bi-curious people, though some authors distinguish heteroflexibility and homoflexibility as lacking the "wish to experiment with sexuality" implied by the bi-curious label. It is important when discussing this continuum to conclude that bisexuality is distinct from heterosexuality and homosexuality rather than simply an extension of said sexualities like the labels heteroflexibility and homoflexibility would imply, due to the prominent erasure and assimilation of bisexuality into other identity groups.[5] To sum it up, the difference between bisexual and bicurious is that bisexual people know that they are sexually attracted to both genders based on personal experience. Bicurious people are still maneuvering their way through their sexuality.[7][8]

Bi-curious is not to be confused with forms of sexual fluidity, defined as a "capacity for situation-dependent flexibility in sexual responsiveness,"[9] as bi-curious implies the existence of one set sexuality for the individual who carries the label, even if it is currently unknown, rather than an acknowledgment that the individual's sexual preference has changed and will continue to change that comes with sexual fluidity.

Bi-curiosity and other non-monosexual identities

[edit]

Standard theories of bi-sexuality make use of the term bisexual umbrella to encompass multiple other non-monosexual identities (sexual identities that allow for multiple gender identity possibilities in partners)[10] that are possible outcomes of exploration for bi-curious people. However, similar on the surface, bisexuality and the subsequent elements of its umbrella are distinct, thus leading to the possibility that a currently bi-curious person may end up as neither bisexual, homosexual, or heterosexual, but another non-monosexual identity altogether.[11] This umbrella can be better broken into further sexual identities, with bisexuality normally including two groups that encompass attraction to the persons own gender and other genders (which will usually include non-binary gender identities too). At the same time, pansexuality includes attraction to an individual regardless of what gender identity they label themselves.[12] The relevance to a bi-curious person is at what range does their exploration end.[13]

Etymology

[edit]

The term started becoming popular after 1984, according to Merriam-Webster, but The New Partridge Dictionary of Slang and Unconventional English and Oxford Dictionaries' Lexico claim that the term was coined in 1990.[14] According to Dictionary.com, the term was first used between 1980 and 1985.[15]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Bi-curious

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Bi-curious is a term used to describe individuals who primarily identify as heterosexual but experience curiosity about engaging in sexual activity with persons of the same sex, often without intending to redefine their sexual orientation as bisexual. This curiosity is frequently framed as exploratory or situational rather than indicative of enduring attraction to both sexes, distinguishing it from established bisexuality. Empirical studies link elevated sexual curiosity—a personality trait involving openness to novel sexual experiences—to bisexual patterns of genital and subjective arousal, particularly among men who self-identify as bisexual, suggesting that high curiosity may underpin or amplify non-exclusive responses. Bisexuality more broadly correlates with increased sexual sensation seeking, curiosity, and excitability compared to exclusive heterosexuality or homosexuality. In population surveys, explicit bi-curious identification remains uncommon, with one UK study finding approximately 1.1% of respondents describing themselves as "bi-curious" or between categories, though related categories like "mostly heterosexual" reveal higher rates of subtle same-sex interest, especially among women. Physiological research indicates that many self-identified heterosexual women exhibit arousal to same-sex stimuli, potentially contributing to reported bi-curiosity without behavioral shifts. The concept has sparked debate over whether bi-curiosity represents genuine fluidity, experimental adventurism, or a reluctance to acknowledge bisexual tendencies, with some research questioning its distinction from primarily heterosexual attractions.

Definition and Terminology

Core Definition

Bi-curious refers to a person, usually self-identifying as heterosexual, who harbors curiosity or openness toward engaging in sexual activity or romantic involvement with someone of the same sex, particularly as a novel experience. This label emphasizes exploratory interest rather than established patterns of attraction, distinguishing it from more fixed orientations. The term does not imply a shift in core sexual orientation but rather a provisional willingness to investigate beyond predominant heterosexual preferences. Empirical studies on note that bi-curious self-identification often arises in contexts of limited prior same-sex experience, serving as a temporary descriptor for those questioning without committing to labeling. Unlike bisexuality, which entails recurrent attractions to multiple genders irrespective of behavior, bi-curiosity typically reflects situational or psychological intrigue without evidence of underlying dual attractions. This nuance highlights how the term functions more as a cultural or personal exploratory marker than a clinical category, with usage peaking in informal settings like personal advertisements since its documented emergence around 1984. Bi-curious individuals typically identify primarily as heterosexual while expressing curiosity about sexual or romantic experiences with the same sex, without necessarily experiencing established attraction to both genders. This contrasts with bisexuality, which denotes a consistent pattern of attraction to both sexes, often persisting beyond initial exploration. Empirical studies indicate that bisexual identification correlates with higher baseline sexual curiosity and sensation-seeking compared to strictly heterosexual or homosexual orientations, suggesting bi-curiosity may represent an exploratory mindset rather than an inherent dual attraction. Unlike , which involves primarily heterosexual individuals who acknowledge occasional same-sex attractions or engagements as part of their orientation, bi-curiosity emphasizes and to discovery without prior confirmed same-sex interest. Heteroflexible persons often describe their same-sex experiences as integrated into a predominantly opposite-sex pattern, whereas bi-curious frequently remains hypothetical or limited to thought experiments prior to any action. Bi-curiosity differs from broader "questioning" of , which may encompass doubt across multiple dimensions of identity without a specific focus on bisexual possibilities. It also precedes or avoids full sexual experimentation, distinguishing it from behavioral trials that might lead to reorientation; on adolescent sexual activities shows that low-intensity same-sex encounters often coexist with opposite-sex ones but do not invariably shift self-identification. In cases where curiosity resolves without identity change, it aligns more with transient interest than with fluidity implying enduring .

Etymology and Historical Development

Origins of the Term

The term "bi-curious" first entered documented English usage in , according to the , which cites this as the earliest evidence of the adjective describing individuals curious about bisexual experiences without full identification as bisexual. concurs, dating the term's origin to , reflecting its emergence in informal discussions of sexual exploration amid evolving understandings of orientation in the post-Stonewall era. places the initial appearance slightly earlier, between 1980 and 1985, likely in personal advertisements or early literature where individuals sought to signal tentative interest in same-sex encounters without committing to a bisexual . No single individual is credited with coining "bi-curious"; it appears to have arisen organically within English-speaking LGBTQ+ communities and heterosexual circles navigating sexual fluidity, combining the prefix "bi-" (from "bisexual," denoting dual-gender attraction, with roots in Latin bis meaning "twice") and "curious" (indicating inquisitive interest rather than established preference). This formation parallels contemporaneous terms like "heteroflexible," emerging as society grappled with Kinsey's 1948-1953 scale findings on orientation spectrums, though predating widespread internet-facilitated discourse by a decade. Some secondary sources suggest a later debut around 1990, possibly tied to bisexual activism's rise, but lexicographic evidence prioritizes the 1980s timeframe as more verifiable. The term's early adoption likely occurred in print media, zines, or classifieds, where stigma around bisexuality prompted nuanced self-descriptors to avoid full disclosure.

Evolution and Usage Over Time

The term "bi-curious" first entered documented English usage in , appearing in a in the Register in , where it described an individual's interest in exploring same-sex experiences despite a primary heterosexual orientation. This initial appearance aligned with the broader linguistic shift in the toward more explicit discussions of sexual experimentation amid evolving social attitudes following the of the and . similarly records as the earliest known use, defining it as openness to or curiosity about sexual relations with someone of from one's usual partners. By the late and early , "bi-curious" proliferated in personal ads and early online forums, reflecting increased visibility of non-monogamous or exploratory sexual identities during a period of heightened awareness around and safer sex practices, which prompted more candid self-descriptions in contexts. Usage expanded in the with the mainstreaming of terminology in media and self-help literature, often distinguishing it from full by emphasizing transient curiosity rather than enduring attraction. Dictionaries and health resources from the 2000s onward formalized its meaning, with sources like noting its debut between 1984 and 1994 as tied to behavioral rather than innate orientation labels prevalent in earlier decades. In the , the term's application has persisted in and surveys, but with growing scrutiny from within bisexual communities, where critics argue it pathologizes as a mere phase, potentially reinforcing stereotypes of instability—though empirical studies on orientation fluidity, such as those tracking self-reports over time, show curiosity can precede stable identification without implying inauthenticity. Google Books Ngram data indicates peak relative frequency around 2005–2010, correlating with media depictions in shows like (1998–2004), before stabilizing amid broader acceptance of spectrum-based identities; however, its usage has declined in academic contexts favoring terms like "heteroflexible" for similar phenomena. Despite this, dating apps and demographic polls as recent as 2023 continue to employ it, with platforms reporting it in user profiles to signal low-commitment exploration.

Scientific and Biological Perspectives

Evidence on Sexual Orientation Stability

Longitudinal studies of self-reported identity in youth, tracking participants from into young adulthood, have found high overall stability, with approximately 90-98% of individuals maintaining consistent identification over periods of 5-10 years. orientation exhibits the greatest stability across genders and age groups, while identities show higher rates of change, often shifting toward . In adulthood, a 10-year panel study of midlife participants (ages 25-75) reported that 98% of those identifying as heterosexual at baseline retained that identity, compared to lower stability for bisexual (around 60-70%) and homosexual (80-90%) identities, with changes more prevalent among women than men. This pattern aligns with genital arousal research, where physiological responses to sexual stimuli demonstrated stability over 12 months in men, supporting a biological basis less prone to alteration, though self-reported attractions showed minor fluctuations. Gender differences are pronounced: meta-analyses and cohort studies indicate women experience greater fluidity in orientation labels and attractions, with up to 20-30% reporting shifts over decades, potentially influenced by social or relational factors, whereas men exhibit near-complete stability (over 95%) in core attractions from onward. Recent analyses of large national panels confirm that while identity changes occur in 5-10% of adults over multi-year spans, these are bidirectional but net toward stability, challenging narratives of widespread fluidity as normative rather than exceptional. Critiques of fluidity claims highlight methodological issues in self-report data, such as retrospective bias or of with innate orientation, with twin and genetic studies reinforcing estimates of 30-50% for orientation, implying developmental entrenchment early in life. Observed changes often correlate with poorer outcomes, suggesting fluidity may reflect distress or experimentation rather than inherent instability. These findings underscore that while or situational experiences can prompt temporary questioning, core remains predominantly fixed for the majority, particularly post-adolescence.

Studies on Sexual Curiosity and Fluidity

A of 2,560 U.S. adults over 10 years found that stability in identity was more prevalent than change, with only about 2% reporting shifts from heterosexual to identities and less than 1% in the reverse direction, suggesting that while fluidity occurs, it is not the norm for most individuals. Similarly, a large national panel study analyzing data from over 10,000 participants indicated that fluidity persists into adulthood but remains relatively rare, with the majority maintaining consistent orientations despite life transitions. These findings align with broader from twin and genetic studies emphasizing biological underpinnings of orientation stability, where changes attributable to or environmental factors are minimal compared to innate predispositions. Gender differences emerge prominently in fluidity research, with women reporting higher rates of variability in attractions and identities than men. Lisa Diamond's decade-long tracking of 79 women revealed that 67% changed their primary romantic or labels at least once, often reflecting situational influences on attractions rather than fixed categories, though underlying patterns of same- versus other-sex responsiveness showed greater consistency. In contrast, male demonstrates lower fluidity, with physiological measures like genital patterns aligning more rigidly with self-reported identities; for instance, a study of bisexual-identified men found that those with elevated exhibited bisexual profiles, while those with lower patterns resembled exclusively homosexual responses, indicating may modulate expression but not fundamentally alter orientation. Empirical investigations into sexual specifically link it to heightened sensation-seeking and experimentation, particularly among bisexual or questioning individuals, but provide limited evidence that it precipitates enduring orientation shifts. Bisexual men and women score higher on measures of sexual and excitability compared to heterosexual or homosexual counterparts, correlating with increased likelihood of cross-orientation behaviors, yet longitudinal show these do not typically override baseline attractions. Reviews of research caution that while situational factors can prompt temporary -driven changes—especially in women—such variability often represents label adjustments amid stable erotic responsiveness, challenging narratives of inherent instability without stronger causal evidence from controlled, long-term cohorts. Academic emphasis on fluidity may reflect selection biases in samples favoring participants, potentially overstating relative to population-level stability observed in broader surveys.

Psychological and Cultural Influences

Psychological Mechanisms of Curiosity

Sexual curiosity, as a subset of general , operates through intrinsic motivational processes that encourage of uncertain or novel domains to resolve informational gaps and anticipate rewards. This mechanism is mediated by neural circuits involving the dopaminergic , where anticipation of potential pleasure from new experiences activates reward prediction errors, driving toward discovery. In the sexual context, such curiosity energizes novelty-seeking behaviors aimed at expanding experiential repertoires, often without implying a shift in core attractions. For bi-curiosity—defined as inquisitiveness about same-sex interactions among those primarily oriented toward —this manifests as heightened interest in atypical erotic scenarios, distinguishable from full by its tentative, exploratory nature. Empirical studies link elevated sexual to bisexual arousal patterns in men, where self-reported curiosity levels predict genital responses to diverse stimuli, independent of identification alone. This suggests a motivational decoupling, wherein psychological drive for variety prompts without necessitating identity change or repeated engagement. Personality traits amplify these mechanisms; sexual sensation seeking (SSS), a dimension of broader sensation seeking, correlates strongly with bi-curious exploration, reflecting a preference for intense, unconventional sexual stimuli. Individuals scoring high on SSS exhibit greater openness to same-sex , potentially as an extension of general erotic novelty pursuit, with itself associated with superior SSS, , and profiles. Such traits, measured via validated scales like the Sexual Sensation Seeking Scale, predict engagement in boundary-testing behaviors, though they do not invariably lead to orientation fluidity. From an evolutionary standpoint, sexual novelty-seeking underpins by favoring adaptive variety in mate evaluation, countering to familiar partners—a phenomenon akin to the , where novel cues reinvigorate arousal. In bi-curious cases, this may transiently extend to same-sex novelty as a low-risk probe of potential mates or stimuli, though emphasizes its role in sustaining long-term satisfaction via diversification rather than reorienting innate preferences. Longitudinal data underscore that while fuels initial interest, stable orientations typically constrain its progression beyond experimentation.

Role of Social and Cultural Factors

Social and cultural factors significantly shape the expression and acknowledgment of bi-curiosity, often by modulating the perceived acceptability of exploring same-sex attractions. In environments with declining heteronormative pressures and reduced stigma against behaviors, individuals report higher rates of curiosity-driven experimentation, as heteronormative historically suppresses such inclinations. For instance, phases of bisexual identity development frequently begin with triggered by cultural , where societal obstacles like homophobia diminish, allowing initial exploration. Media representation plays a pivotal role in normalizing bi-curiosity, with increased depictions of sexual behaviors correlating with greater self-identification among audiences, particularly women who exhibit more reported fluidity in attractions and identities than men. Peer influence further amplifies this, as social networks providing affirmation and reduced exclusion encourage bisexual or curious individuals to pursue experiences, though bisexuals often face unique on platforms that can deter or complicate exploration. Broader cultural norms, including laws, religion, and , interact with these dynamics; for example, in contexts with permissive sexual norms, bi-curiosity aligns with elevated sexual sensation-seeking, yet persistent and ideals can constrain male expression more than female. Studies indicate that while genetic factors contribute to orientation, environmental influences like these sociocultural elements account for variability in labeling and behavioral fluidity, with identity changes persisting into adulthood amid shifting norms. This suggests bi-curiosity often emerges as a socially contingent response rather than solely innate drive, though tempers claims of pure constructionism by highlighting interplay with biological predispositions.

Prevalence and Representation

A 2016 national probability sample survey of over 20,000 adults found that 0.1% self-identified their as "bi-curious," a category distinct from bisexual identification. Large-scale demographic surveys and elsewhere rarely include "bi-curious" as a distinct response option, likely because it describes situational rather than a stable orientation, leading to underreporting or with heterosexual or bisexual categories. In contrast, self-reported bisexual identification—which may encompass individuals who transitioned from bi-curiosity—has risen substantially in recent decades, particularly among younger cohorts and women. A Gallup poll of U.S. adults conducted June–December 2024 reported 5.2% identifying as bisexual, up from 3.5% in 2012, comprising over half of the 9.3% total LGBTQ+ identifiers. Bisexual rates were markedly higher among (15.3%) compared to (1.9%), with women outpacing men (e.g., 3.7% vs. 1.6% in 2021–2022 U.S. representative data). A survey from summer 2023 similarly found 4% of U.S. adults identifying as bisexual, with 11% of those under 30 doing so—far exceeding rates in older groups (5% for ages 30–49). These trends correlate with increased reports of or uncertainty; for example, 67% of bisexual-identifying Americans in a 2025 survey indicated recent doubts about their attractions. However, bisexual identification does not equate to prior bi-curiosity, as many heterosexual respondents in arousal studies show non-exclusive patterns without self-labeling as curious or bisexual. Overall, the scarcity of targeted bi-curious metrics limits precise prevalence estimates, though rising bisexual rates suggest growing openness to non-monogendered attractions among youth.

Depiction in Media and Society

Bi-curiosity has been portrayed in media primarily as a transient phase of sexual experimentation, often among heterosexual women, emphasizing titillation over depth. In films like (2010), the protagonist Ramona Flowers dismisses her past same-sex involvement as merely "a little bi-curious," framing it as a fleeting curiosity rather than indicative of enduring orientation. Similarly, and early 2000s cinema, including (1992) and (1999), popularized "," where female bi-curiosity served narrative devices for erotic appeal, reinforcing stereotypes of without exploring psychological complexity. Television representations have sporadically acknowledged bi-curiosity without heavy stigma, as in certain modern series where characters label relationships as "bi-curious" neutrally, signaling gradual normalization amid broader LGBTQ+ . However, such depictions often conflate bi-curiosity with , contributing to erasure or simplification, where curiosity is depicted as a "sexy phase" rather than a potential vector for fluidity. In , bi-curiosity garners mixed reception, with empirical data indicating heightened against bisexual identifiers compared to or individuals, extending to those expressing mere . Surveys reveal that self-identifying as bi-curious can exacerbate stigma within both heterosexual and LGBTQ+ circles, perceived as indecisiveness or performative attention-seeking, though proponents argue it reflects natural exploratory tendencies more prevalent than acknowledged. By , urban social scenes evidenced rising "girl-on-girl" bi-curious subcultures, such as clubs attracting predominantly straight-identifying women, suggesting cultural amid persistent toward male counterparts, who face amplified undesirability in heterosexual contexts. Critics within bisexual advocacy contend that casual bi-curious labeling undermines committed bisexual identities by implying impermanence, perpetuating biphobic narratives of infidelity or transition to .

Criticisms and Debates

Challenges to the Concept's Validity

Longitudinal research on reveals substantial stability, particularly for heterosexual identities, undermining claims that bi-curiosity represents a meaningful shift toward rather than episodic interest. In a national panel study tracking over 10,000 U.S. adults, heterosexual self-identification showed very low fluidity, with change rates below 1% over one-year intervals and under 5% over seven years, even as groups exhibited higher variability. Similarly, a 10-year analysis of Midlife in the United States (MIDUS) data found that 98% of men and 89% of women reported stable orientation identities, with changes more common among those initially identifying as bisexual but rarely leading to exclusive same-sex attraction. These patterns suggest bi-curiosity often resolves without redefining core orientation, aligning with that most reported curiosities do not persist as enduring attractions. Physiological assessments further question the validity of bi-curiosity as reflective of innate duality in attractions. Genital arousal patterns, measured via plethysmography, exhibit high stability over time, uncorrelated with self-reported shifts in orientation. In a 15-year of 119 participants, self-identified changes (affecting 9.6% of bisexual men and 19.4% of bisexual women) did not align with corresponding alterations in arousal specificity to preferred stimuli, indicating that subjective or fluidity claims may overestimate underlying biological consistency. This discordance implies bi-curiosity could stem from cognitive or situational factors rather than fixed physiological , as arousal responses—less susceptible to —remain anchored to early-established preferences. Cultural and informational influences exacerbate skepticism toward bi-curiosity's distinctiveness, as experimental manipulations demonstrate how beliefs in orientation fluidity can induce transient non-exclusivity. Two studies with over 600 heterosexual participants found that reading about continuous or fluid models of sexuality increased reports of non-exclusive attractions (up to 36% vs. 7.8% in controls) and orientation uncertainty (41.6% vs. 19.6%), without fixed-theory exposure producing similar effects. Such results portray bi-curiosity as potentially iatrogenic—fostered by prevalent narratives in media and academia emphasizing malleability—rather than an empirically discrete category supported by causal mechanisms like genetics or prenatal hormones, which better predict stable monosexuality in population-level data. Critics, drawing on these findings, argue the term risks pathologizing normal variability in thought or behavior as identity reconfiguration, absent verifiable markers distinguishing it from heterosexual experimentation or anxiety-driven rumination akin to sexual orientation OCD.

Associated Risks and Societal Concerns

Bisexual individuals, who may overlap with bi-curious experiences through experimentation, exhibit elevated rates of depressive symptoms, anxiety, and suicidality compared to heterosexuals and often monosexual lesbian or gay individuals. Systematic reviews confirm bisexuals face higher odds of mood disorders and suicidal ideation, potentially exacerbated by identity ambiguity or minority stress rather than inherent orientation stability. Sexual fluidity, including shifts prompted by curiosity, correlates with increased depression and emotional disruptions, particularly among adolescents navigating identity changes. Physically, bi-curious experimentation involving same-sex partners elevates (STI) risks, as bisexual populations report higher incidences of , , , and than heterosexuals. Men who have with men (MSM), a category encompassing some bi-curious activity, show markedly higher rates of these infections in clinical data. Bisexual women face disproportionate vulnerability due to bridging behaviors between heterosexual and MSM networks. Regret following casual or exploratory sexual encounters is more pronounced in women, often linked to post-act or perceived , which could apply to bi-curious same-sex trials lacking prior attraction stability. Qualitative accounts of first same-sex experiences highlight mixed outcomes, including reflection on motivations but limited longitudinal data on long-term dissatisfaction. Societally, sexual fluidity tied to curiosity contributes to broader health disparities, straining mental health services with bisexuals' higher utilization rates amid poorer outcomes. Empirical patterns suggest fluidity disrupts identity management, fostering stress that elevates population-level psychological burdens without corresponding adaptive benefits in stable orientations. These dynamics raise concerns over cultural normalization of experimentation potentially amplifying regret and health costs, though direct causal links to societal instability remain understudied.

References

  1. https://www.webmd.com/sex/what-is-bicurious
  2. https://www.healthline.com/health/bi-curious
  3. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283098100_Identity_plus_Bi-curiosity_sexual_adventurism_and_the_boundaries_of_%27straight%27_sexual_practices_and_identities
  4. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24055219/
  5. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0191886914002037
  6. https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/research_report_35_sexual_orientation_explored.pdf
  7. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32356085/
  8. https://www.essex.ac.uk/blog/posts/2023/02/02/women-are-more-likely-to-identify-as-bisexual-can-research-into-sexual-arousal-tell-us-why
  9. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5380700/
  10. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0273229713000026
  11. https://www.oed.com/dictionary/bi-curious_adj
  12. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1878&context=psychfacpub
  13. https://www.health.com/mind-body/lgbtq-health/bicurious
  14. https://www.embracesexualwellness.com/esw-blog/2023/8/28/exploring-bi-curiosity-what-does-bi-curiosity-mean-and-how-is-it-different-from-bisexuality
  15. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31600003/
  16. https://www.livescience.com/2254-study-bisexuality-experimental-phase.html
  17. https://learn.rumie.org/jR/bytes/how-do-i-support-my-bi-curious-partner/
  18. https://www.yourdictionary.com/bi-curious
  19. https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/what-is-bi-curious-meaning
  20. https://feeld.co/magazine/playbook/feeld-guides/definition-bi-curiosity
  21. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bi-curious
  22. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3081371/
  23. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21584828/
  24. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00224499.2022.2060927
  25. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-025-03226-y
  26. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00224499.2023.2289517
  27. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0018506X19304660
  28. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10289116/
  29. https://midus.wisc.edu/findings/pdfs/1153.pdf
  30. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13558358.2020.1818541
  31. https://www.[researchgate](/page/ResearchGate).net/publication/261839583_Bisexuality_is_associated_with_elevated_sexual_sensation_seeking_sexual_curiosity_and_sexual_excitability
  32. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2352250X22002184
  33. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4635443/
  34. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0301051113001981
  35. https://repository.essex.ac.uk/8229/1/Arousal%2520&%2520Curiosity%2520Revised%252009-10-13.pdf
  36. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-myths-of-sex/202311/why-we-crave-sexual-novelty
  37. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/extraordinary-relationships/202407/the-psychology-of-sexual-novelty
  38. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24055219
  39. https://digitalcommons.unf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2281&context=etd
  40. https://www.scielo.br/j/csc/a/VPxGFPV9CLHDtnDNMwBKr4w/
  41. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/302593624_Bisexuality_Mental_Health_and_Media_Representation
  42. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13691058.2022.2092213
  43. https://www.jmir.org/2022/9/e38449/
  44. https://open.maricopa.edu/culturepsychology/chapter/sexuality-and-culture/
  45. https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%257CA21158930&sid=googleScholar&v=2.1&it=r&linkaccess=abs&issn=11884517&p=HRCA&sw=w
  46. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11106125/
  47. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4835230/
  48. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308760959_The_Diversity_and_Prevalence_of_Sexual_Orientation_Self-Labels_in_a_New_Zealand_National_Sample
  49. https://news.gallup.com/poll/656708/lgbtq-identification-rises.aspx
  50. https://www.queermajority.com/essays-all/the-data-behind-the-bisexual-revolution
  51. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37345997/
  52. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/06/28/for-pride-month-6-facts-about-bisexual-americans/
  53. https://www.americansurveycenter.org/newsletter/whats-behind-the-rapid-rise-in-lgbtq-identity/
  54. https://www.clearerthinking.org/post/the-bisexual-revolution
  55. http://www.cwupulsemagazine.com/features/2018/10/29/bi-on-the-big-screen
  56. https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/jun/27/its-twentybiteen-girl-on-girl-culture-is-peaking-and-its-about-time
  57. https://www.incluvie.com/articles/visi-bi-lity-its-improving
  58. https://radicalbi.wordpress.com/2012/04/25/hot-sexy-bi-babes-media-depictions-of-bisexual-women/
  59. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10035584/
  60. https://belluwmadison.wordpress.com/2018/11/15/is-bi-curiosity-an-appropriation-of-queer-culture/
  61. https://bi.org/en/articles/bi-men-are-not-considered-attractive-new-study-says
  62. https://www.yourtango.com/2021340984/why-term-bi-curious-hurting-bisexual-community
  63. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-94479-9
  64. https://iocdf.org/blog/2021/06/21/bisexuality-sexual-orientation-ocd-double-invalidation/
  65. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31521866/
  66. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9636102/
  67. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00224499.2017.1387755
  68. https://www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Committee/421/HESA/Brief/BR10445371/br-external/TorontoBisexualNetwork-e.pdf
  69. https://www.psychiatry.org/getmedia/78267295-37e1-4894-8cc7-bff2ac39bb72/Mental-Health-Facts-for-Bisexual-Populations.pdf
  70. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1075815/full
  71. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2377304/
  72. https://www.stdcheck.com/blog/lgbt-std-statistics/
  73. https://www.droracle.ai/articles/345980/do-homosexual-couples-tend-to-have-more-stds-than-heterosexual-couples
  74. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0191886918300539
  75. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00224499.2021.1960944
  76. https://www.rainbowhealthontario.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/RHO_FactSheet_BIHEALTH_E.pdf
  77. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9874312/
  78. https://read.dukeupress.edu/demography/article/60/4/1257/381063/Sexual-Fluidity-Implications-for-Population
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.