degrees of bi inclusion

At some point, not necessarily soon, I'm thinking of writing something about degrees of bi inclusion in organisations that are called lesbian & gay, LGB or LGBT.

One of the areas I'm particularly interested in is the situation where an organisation moves towards including bi people (e.g. changing the name), but hasn't really arrived at equality yet. So that it's awareness that's missing more than goodwill.

I'm thinking of indicators like...

• The new official name is LGB, but it hasn't percolated through to all the paperwork yet, so that the mission statement, or even maybe just the odd leaflet, still refer to L&G.
  
• All the paperwork uses the terms LGB, but leaders or spokespeople for the group often miss out the B in spoken announcements.
  
• The only people who ever point out the missing "B" are bi people.
  
• People joining the group are assumed to be gay or lesbian unless they say otherwise.
  
• People are passing as gay or lesbian within the group because they're scared to come out as bi.
  
• Non-same-sex partners are not really welcome at social events.
  
• Anti-bi jokes are acceptable, where racist or sexist or homophobic jokes would not be.
  
• Invited guests (e.g. speakers or workshop leaders) are rarely or never bi.
  
• The group has never done any bisexuality awareness raising.
  
• The group did some bisexuality awareness, and that was the week that none of the group leaders or committee turned up for the meeting.

I'm particularly interested in the subtler ones, because part of what I want to accomplish with this writing is something useful for L&G people to go and do a sort of audit on their group. Like "How bi-inclusive is your group really?".

At the bi awareness training day that K and I did last autumn to a group of lesbians, there was an interesting discussion about this, and someone came out with the term "bi-tolerant". A lot of people then described their group or workplace as "bi-tolerant" rather than "bi-friendly". It was interesting. And it was clear that most or all of those people had a lot of willingness to put in what was missing, now that they saw it. So I think there are probably a lot of groups out there who think that because they've got B in the name, they're doing pretty well, but haven't really thought through the implications.

Stories? ideas? comments?