Perhaps Almodóvar and Ozon are onto something by not only providing a multitude of characters with varying identities, but also by avoiding labels and embracing fluidity. “Almodóvar’s films represent an eloquent example of queering gender as a way to vindicate the rights of stigmatized identities” (Pastor 2). In an analysis of queer representation in film, Hanson addresses the murky lines between representation, appropriation, misrepresentation, and critical outrage at what passes for queer in mainstream cinema. Hanson has identified three models of queer film criticism, including “a moralistic politics of representation that seeks to liberate us from damaging stereotypes”(7). This is referring to critics who not only want queer representation in film and media, but they want positive representation. In the case of minority representation under the queer umbrella, we are looking for more representation specific to bisexuals and bisexuality. “We are still in the throes of a lesbian and gay campaign for so-called positive images, representations of sexual minorities as normal, happy, intelligent, kind, sexually well-adjusted, professionally adept, politically correct ladies and gentleman” (Hanson 7). On one hand, I understand where these critics are coming from and why they seek what they seek. For a century, films and television have subjected queer characters to pain and death, have made them out to be villains (and therefore worthy of pain and death), or have made them invisible to all but the discerning audience member. Women loving women are less likely to be represented, and bisexuals are practically non-existent. Queer advocates would love to see happy and positive characters in film to be able to point to them and say, “See? Worth the same rights as you.” Realistically, this is not a fair criticism. First of all, who determines what is normal? While one viewer could enjoy watching an older man copulating with a younger man (as seen in Almodóvar’s Bad Education and Law of Desire), another viewer could find it distasteful or inappropriate. Who determines what is “sexually well-adjusted”? Promiscuity could be seen as a “damaging stereotype” by one critic, while another could point out that many men and women engage in promiscuity with no detrimental repercussions. Despite there being a “b” and a “t” in “LGBTQ” and “LGBTQIA”, there is still rampant biphobia and transphobia, and bi-invisibility, even amongst the queer community. In Law of Desire, Tina experiences blatant transphobia in the film when interacting with the cops. This is a realistic scene, and worth portraying. While viewers may not want to witness the sexual abuse of a minor at the hands of a teacher or a priest, it is a reality both in the 80s and now, and at least in Bad Education it is tastefully portrayed, though still squeamish and awful. In both Bad Education and Law of Desire, the trans characters experienced abuse as a child by a person who was close to them and in an authoritative position. A queer film critic could argue that it would be more helpful to the trans community to have a trans character live a happy and full life with no history of abuse looming in their background. The bisexuality in these films could go unnoticed, if one is not paying attention to the details.