I want to start this review off by saying that I think this book is a great starting resource for queer history in the US, defining terms for people who may not be familiar with them, and providing guidance for queer people who may be looking for information. Also, the art is fantastic--it's colorful and is a great style, and I really think it adds a lot to the book. But now we get to the bad parts.

I was enjoying the book for the most part, but the whole time in the back of my mind I was wondering where the mentions of bisexual people were. I experience enough bi-erasure in my life that it was kind of annoying to find that, yet again, we were practically invisible in this book. There is one mention of BiNet USA. That in itself was a little disappointing because that organization caused some hoopla by trying to copyright the bisexual flag, which was not cool (the idea of pride flags is that they belong to the communities they represent, not to individuals or companies).

Then bisexuality doesn't really show up again until the section defining sexualities and gender identities. And this is the part that really bothered me. The authors of this book define bisexuality as attraction to men and women. That was an acceptable definition in the past, but it has generally been agreed that bisexuality is defined as attraction to people of your own gender and others. Limiting it to the binary of men and women erases trans and nonbinary people. Yes, that definition overlaps quite a bit with pansexuality, but having more labels means more options to choose from.

The binary definition in this book just reinforces the idea that bisexual people are transphobic or cannot be attracted to trans or nonbinary people. Just "men and women." And that really rubs me the wrong way. Especially for a book that was written just last year.

Biphobia and bi-erasure happen enough outside the LGBTQIA community that it was a little disheartening to see in a book that is otherwise one of the most inclusive and encompassing books I've read about queer history and culture. The authors do a good job of including queer BIPOC history-makers and acknowledge the fact that much of queer history as we know it is whitewashed because that is the only history that was deemed worthy of saving. They also went into great detail about the AIDS crisis and how it decimated a generation of queer people while the government stood by and did nothing.

I honestly skimmed the rest of the book after the explanation of what bisexual means. I'm just really frustrated that this book left me feeling disappointed overall after doing such a good job otherwise. Yet again, bisexuals are left feeling like a footnote in the overall larger scope of queer American history.

Edit: I am back with more thoughts. I got tied up in criticizing the bisexual aspects of this book (or lack thereof) because that is what annoyed me the most as a bisexual person. But now that I've had a little bit of time to sit with it, I'm also disappointed in how much of this book is centered on cis men. They make up the majority of the book, even with the inclusion of several trans activists. And similarly, asexual people are shoved even more into the corner than bisexual people because the only mention I recall is, again, in the definition section.

I know no book can be everything for everyone, but I feel like this one could have been better. And the reason I've written such a long review for it is that its failings feel personal to me, which is definitely not fun. I'm going to move on and make an effort to track down more books that center bisexual people and their specific challenges, because I have found over and over again that most things encompassing queer culture offer very little in the way of bisexual representation.