Towards the end of her paper, Marilyn Frye marks a difference between ‘being’ and ‘acting’ lesbian, a difference which also distinguishes authentic and inauthentic lesbians. What I want to do in this chapter, firstly, is to examine the relation between acting and being that Frye raises and, secondly, to consider the implications of this relation for her notion of ‘communication and community’. Central to this twofold exploration, and to almost all of the constructions of bisexuality analysed throughout the book so far, are the themes of representation and identity. Not only Frye and Card, but a number of other theorists of identity too, as I will illustrate, presuppose that the relation between representation and identity is mimetic. Yet the ability of the ‘bisexual’ woman in Card's analysis to pass as an authentic lesbian calls attention to the fragility of this relation and, in so doing, disrupts the assumptions on which the community that Frye describes is based. I will be examining how, in order to reinscribe the assumed relation between representation and identity, the role of the other (who is required to recognise and confirm identity) is privileged, which in its turn produces a tendency to negate difference in favour of a narcissistic model of identity based on sameness. Deleuze and Guattari's notion of facialisation aids in an understanding of the ways in which just such a negation transforms the ‘bisexual’ woman into an ‘inauthentic lesbian’.