We Need To Talk About Queerbaiting
November 2, 2022By Dylan Mann-Hazell, Content Writer and Marketing Intern at myGwork
What is queerbaiting, why is it a topic of conversation recently, and how does this effect the LGBTQ+ community?
For anyone unfamiliar with the term, queerbaiting is an expression initially coined in the 1970s to describe a marketing technique with the aim of subtly attracting the attention of the LGBTQ+ community. Since fandom and internet culture reared its head in the early 2010s, the term has become popularized and widely used to call out and discuss the legitimacy of LGBTQ+ representation in the media. Most notably, it was used in reference to films and television shows that featured characters alluded to be LGBTQ+, with a deliberately incorporated romantic/sexual tension or ambiguity, without following through on any genuine or authentic queer representation. It is thought that this writing technique exists, consciously or unconsciously, as an attempt to lure in LGBTQ+ viewers without alienating anti-LGBTQ+ viewers.
A prominent example of a piece of media that has been accused of queerbaiting is BBC’s Sherlock, which consistently insinuated that the bond between main characters Holmes and Watson was perhaps stronger than friendship. Writer Steven Moffat denied any intention for these characters to come across as romantic, leading to critics offering instances within the show that suggest otherwise, thus opening up many conversations, social media posts and popular video essays about the effects of queerbaiting. This technique has also been attributed to movies that have advertised the incorporation of LGBTQ+ content in their promotional material, e.g., Beauty and the Beast and Cruella, but turn out to feature very minor, easily missed roles in the overall story.
Used in this way, the term queerbaiting is important – necessary, even, to call out an outdated and patronizing method of manipulating a community that deserves better representation. However, as with every trend that catches on in social media, the term has evolved into something entirely new. In recent years, it has become popular to attribute the label to actors, singers, and other prominent figures who have not publicly divulged their sexuality. Those who use the term in this way may think they are pushing for inclusivity and openness, but the impact this is having on the LGBTQ+ community, particularly those still closeted, is becoming increasingly damaging.
Harry Styles, Charlie Puth, Becky Albertalli, and most recently Kit Connor are all renowned figures who have shown their open support for the LGBTQ+ community. In every case, they have also been accused of queerbaiting for a variety of reasons. Though Harry Styles chooses not to put a label on his sexuality, he has been a consistent supporter for LGBTQ+ rights in the past, taking many moments to highlight the importance of spreading love towards that community. This, combined with his nonconformist fashion sense, has led many people to believe that Styles is not part of the queer community and is deliberately using ambiguity to capitalize off LGBTQ+ fans. Pop singer Charlie Puth has also expressed open support for the community, though it is as a result of posting provocative photographs on social media that some people believe he is deliberately stringing along the gay community as a form of promotion. Becky Albertalli, author of the novel that inspired Love, Simon, was accused of being a straight woman using the queer community to make a career. Similarly, young actor Kit Connor who plays bisexual character Nick Nelson in Heartstopper was hounded on social media for not being open about his own sexual orientation.
In the case of Becky Albertalli and Kit Connor, both were forced to come out as bisexual to stop the abundance of hate directed their way. It has come to a point where the term queerbaiting is no longer used to call out cishet media bosses for their weak depictions of the LGBTQ+ community – but is instead used against members of the community to feed into the recent destructive narrative that not publicly labelling yourself is problematic. All of these figures, plus the dozens more that are accused and hounded on social platforms, have done nothing to warrant the level of fury they face. It is not a win for the LGBTQ+ community if people are being forced out the closet or feel they need to categorize themselves to appease an angry crowd. It paints the community in a poor, shameful light.
Kit Connor is 18 years old. An age where many are still figuring things out and plucking up the confidence to be their authentic self. Despite his unabashed support of the LGBTQ+ community, and his award-winning portrayal of an LGBTQ+ character struggling with coming out, he was still subject to swathes of criticism from people who felt an entitlement towards accessing his private life. As he rightly pointed out in his brief return to Twitter, “some of you missed the point of the show.”
Calling out queerbaiting in fictional media when and where it has occurred is vital if LGBTQ+ representation is to improve. But this recent evolution of the term does more harm than good, simply furthering the damaging assumption that everyone is cisgender and heterosexual unless stated otherwise. What happened to Kit Connor should serve as a reminder that true inclusivity goes beyond those open and confident in their identities, and support should always be extended to people who prefer to remain private.
Keep up to date with the latest myGnews