In 2026, the Berlin State Office for Equal Treatment and Against Discrimination (LADS), part of the Berlin Senate Department for Labour, Social Affairs, Equality, Integration, Diversity and Anti-Discrimination (SenASGIVA), published a report identifying research gaps concerning Bi+ people for the first time. We explicitly welcome the fact that the significant gaps in research on Bi+ lived experiences are now also being acknowledged at the state policy level.
The expertise of Fachstelle Bi+ (Bi+ Competence Center) contributed to the development of this publication. Ahead of its release, we identified key gaps in the available data based on our professional work and provided LADS with relevant research, literature references, and additional sources. Many of the topics we raised are reflected in the publication, including research needs concerning Bi+ men, intersectional lived experiences, neurodivergence, health, parenthood, and family members. The publication also acknowledges the professional exchange with Fachstelle Bi+. In addition to contributing substantive perspectives, Fachstelle Bi+ provided relevant academic literature as part of this exchange.
At the same time, we would like to expand on the publication by adding perspectives informed by our professional work and expertise on Bi+ lived experiences. For example, we prefer to speak of Bi+ identities and lived experiences or Bi+ people, rather than framing Bi+ exclusively in terms of “Bi+ sexuality.” Bi+ can describe romantic as well as sexual orientation and attraction, for example in the case of biromantic asexual people. Furthermore, for many people, Bi+ is not merely a description of attraction but also an important part of their identity and social positioning.
From our perspective, the linguistic focus on “sexuality” is not neutral, particularly because Bi+ people continue to experience hypersexualization and fetishization. Bi+ people are frequently stereotyped as particularly promiscuous, sexually available, or unfaithful. Such stereotypes can contribute to discrimination and devaluation and are associated with sexual and intimate partner violence, particularly against Bi+ women. Bi+ trans* and non-binary people also experience particularly high levels of multiple discrimination, threats, and violence. Using language that does not define Bi+ lived experiences exclusively through sexuality can help avoid unintentionally reproducing these stereotypes. See also Korinth et al., 2024 and Walters et al., 2013.
At the same time, from a scientific perspective, it is important to include people who experience attraction to more than one gender but do not identify as Bi+. The publication explicitly highlights this methodological consideration as well.
A consistently intersectional perspective is particularly important to us. The publication clearly acknowledges that intersections with gender identity, origin, racialization, disability, age, and socioeconomic status have so far received insufficient attention. From our perspective, intersectional Bi+ research must also systematically examine how racialization, migrantization, classism, ableism, anti-TIN* hostility (meaning hostility toward trans*, inter*, and non-binary people), and other systems of discrimination interact with anti-Bi+ hostility and Bi+ erasure.
We continue to see a particularly significant research gap regarding experiences of violence among Bi+ trans*, inter*, and non-binary people. The publication points out that TIN* people are particularly likely to identify within the Bi+ spectrum and explicitly calls for research to more closely examine the intersections between sexual orientation and gender identity. At the same time, reliable data on how anti-Bi+ hostility, anti-TIN* hostility, and other forms of multiple discrimination specifically affect experiences of violence remain largely unavailable. From our perspective, this research gap urgently needs to be addressed, particularly to develop prevention measures, counseling services, and protection against violence that adequately respond to people’s needs.
We also continue to see a need for further research on discrimination and Bi+ erasure in healthcare, loneliness and social isolation, and the lived experiences of older Bi+ people, among other topics. We therefore consider this publication not a comprehensive or final overview, but an important starting point for more nuanced and intersectional research on Bi+ lived experiences in Berlin and Germany.
You can read the full publication, “Bi+sexualität – Forschungsdesiderate” (Bi+ Sexuality – Research Gaps), published by Berlin’s LADS, here.