bi health politics

Apr 11, 2007 13:39

Been pondering the politics of so-called "bisexual health", and looking at relevant research (such as it is, which isn't a lot when you come to specifically bi stuff ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 4

cryx April 12 2007, 07:34:38 UTC
I think the hypothesis is a valid one to test, and I'm afraid I can't help on 2..

Reply


skibbley April 13 2007, 13:50:02 UTC
This Australian site links to a few talks and papers
http://www.glhv.org.au/?q=taxonomy/term/7&from=30
including:

Bisexuality and Health Psychology - Strange Bedfellows?
(An Australian study)
http://www.glhv.org.au/files/bisexuality_health_psych.pdf

and:

Improving the Access and Quality of Public Health Services for Bisexuals (Canada)
Health Psychology Update, Vol. 14, Issue 2, 2005.
http://www.glhv.org.au/files/bisexual_health_canada.pdf

Reply


lovingboth April 14 2007, 11:39:33 UTC
1. It's the invisibility issue that pisses me off the most, even if there are understandable reasons for it.

2. NATSAL is the nearest to that. You want the second one, because the figures are higher methodology is better.

Summary at http://www.avert.org/hsexu1.htm and most of them will be bi, not lesbian/gay.

The authors (all of the ones I've met are lovely and at least one of them is bisexual) reckon these are minimum figures, not least because these questions get higher non-response rates.

That HEA/Sigma report I should be able to get my hands on on Monday had to stop advertising for BB men because they were swamped.

Reply


k anonymous June 17 2007, 09:30:02 UTC

. Much respect!

Reply


Leave a comment

Up