fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2804 ]

[ SECRET POST #2804 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2804 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 064 secrets from Secret Submission Post #401.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 1 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 2 - unrelated .gifs ], [ 1 - posted twice ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Why? Current shows do it all the time.

No, no they don't. They might be fanbaiting the kind of slash fangirls who take "let my gays marry" signs to pride parades, sure. But no one's going out of their way to bring in actual queer audiences via Tumblr's white dude pairing of the month and then ~snatching precious representation away from them~, and the way fandom has made up the term "queerbaiting" so that they can pretend that "I want my OTP to be canon!!!" is a social justice issue is genuinely fucking gross.

I think it's pretty dickish to constantly play up homoerotic subtext and then go NO HOMO, though, the way some popular pieces of media do. The fans who only care about LGBT representation as it relates to their OTP, however, are indeed dumb.

The only show I can think of that really does that in a gross way is Sherlock. A lot of "homoerotic subtext" is just obsessed fans seeing things.

See, given how fandom and creators are increasingly colliding though, I do think that there are shows that intentionally ramp that stuff up in an attempt to appeal those fans. And I don't think they're blameless either.

Eh, they see that homoerotic subtext is selling so they're putting homoerotic subtext in their TV/movies - but none of them are pretending that they're going for queer representation. I find that a lot less offensive than fans who screech about representation when really their care stops at their favorite white dicks touching.

To me, it's more offensive on the creator's parts because it's manipulative and they clearly reap financial benefits from it. Fans wanting their OTP to be canon (and using LGBT issues as a pretext) is dumb but I can see why it happens too -- when creators make the most emotionally fulfilling relationships between two white dudes, it's not surprising that that's who the fans ship.

I just wish that writers would actually develop the real romantic interests if they're not going to make a queer pairing canon. Because we're often left with a string of superficial relationships, homoerotic subtext, and NO HOMO jokes. Which doesn't really make anyone happy.

Creators manipulate all kings of things to get sweet $$$ from their fans. That's how it works.

And like - I'm not annoyed by people wanting their OTPs to be canon (as long as they're not campaigning for it because holy second-hand embarrassment, Batman). I'd certainly love for some of my OTPs to be canon. But FTLOG, call it what it is and stop trying to make yourself feel better about it by wrapping it in SJ terms. (Uh, general "you". Not you, obviously.)

I agree with you to an extent. I just think it's more scummy on the creator's part because there are queer people who legitimately get their hopes up with some of these pairings only to have them crushed while the creators reap the sweet financial reward. Fans, whatever their crazy shenanigans, don't really get much of a monetary bonus out of it. It just seems really cold-blooded on the creators' parts to me.

But I agree with you that people who use LGBT representation or race representation or trans representation or whatever representation to cry about their OTPs are trivializing something important. Especially when they make other fans feel like shit for not liking the pairing.

I really doubt there are all that many actual queer people who look to the kind of pairings that Tumblr accuses of "queerbaiting" for representation. While the situation is obviously far from ideal, in this day and age there is a choice of shows and movies with actual queer characters that they can seek out.

(Uh, I don't like supporting my arguments with anecdata but I feel like I should clarify that I'm speaking from experience here. When I was 16 and going through that whole realization that I was maybe a little in love with my girl friend, I was thirsty for any kind of same-sex-bffs-falling-in-love storyline. So I went and mainlined an entire storyline of that exact kind from a British soap opera on YouTube.)

I can believe it largely because I do see quite a few LGBT people who ship popular slash pairings. I know of a few queer male fic writers for some of my favorite pairings as well. The person who I talk about my favorite slash ship most often is a lesbian too.

I'm not saying there aren't better options out there, but I still think creators can be rather exploitative. I also feel this way because, whatever their faults, a good many fans ARE rather young and inexperienced so I cut them more slack than the creators who are usually at least in their 30s.

Wow this just in there are no queer people in fandom.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2014-09-06 23:23 (UTC) - Expand

*raises hand*

Queer woman here (specifically, bi leaning asexual, though I'm still not sure how much of my asexuality is innate and how much is due to serotonin levels), and you've completely described me in that first paragraph. I don't watch much TV in general, and what I do watch is pretty much exclusively SFF (but not horror; I'm a huge scaredy-cat) and/or mysteries and/or procedurals. So while I know that there's queer TV out there, it tends not to crop up in shows that I'm interested in.

Granted, I share your frustration with pairing-specific claims of queerbaiting in certain fandoms, e.g. Teen Wolf. I might ship Sterek in my own time, but on the show, I just want Stiles to come out as bi canonically, regardless of whether he's dating Derek or Scott or Danny or Lydia.

But in other fandoms, I'm as hardline as any other shipper; for instance Rizzoli and Isles, where only Rizzoli/Isles would make me feel validated after all that ship-teasing.

I haven't the first clue how universal my experience is, but also anecdotally, I'm definitely a "queer [person] who look[s] to the kind of pairings that Tumblr accuses of 'queerbaiting' for representation."

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2014-09-06 23:35 (UTC) - Expand

Queerbaiting doesn't mean that the show is actually trying to bring in queer audiences though. It means that it tries to appeal to a shallow idea of representation while not actually providing any. The people who want, say, Sherlock and Watson to be canon are actually ignoring the queerbaiting, because they misread the show making fun of the idea of including a LGBT character or couple as something meaningful.

No, "queerbaiting" would be baiting queer people. Words mean things. And also, that's just the point I was trying to make - these shows don't "try to appeal to a shallow idea of representation while not actually providing any." They're not doing it to provide an illusion of queer representation, they're either doing it to fuck with crazy fans, which shows have been doing for ages, or they're not actually doing it at all. BBC Sherlock isn't ~queerbaiting~, it's just stuck 15 years ago when people still thought being mistaken for gay was grade A comedy.

I looked up the definition and the first referenced is on urban dictionary:

queer baiting
When people in the media (usually television/movies) add homoerotic tension between two characters to attract more liberal and queer viewers with the indication of them not ever getting together for real in the show/book/movie.
"Hey did you watch the new Supernatural episode last night"

"Nah all the queer baiting in it makes me want to bash my head in. I quit watching Sherlock for that reason too."

It seems that a lot of people define queerbaiting as providing homoerotic tension without ever having the intention of making a couple canon. I'm not sure where you're getting "an illusion of queer representation" because I've seen the term used in the urban dictionary context far more commonly. Looking on Google scholar wasn't much help either as it doesn't seem to be a very popular term in academia in regards to media.

lmao urban dictionary. Who exactly do you think put that definition there? The same tweens who made it up. That doesn't mean it makes any more sense.

Also lol

to attract more liberal and queer viewers

That is exactly what I'm talking about, idk how many other ways to put it. The shows don't do it to attract ~more liberal~ viewers and they especially don't do it to attract queer viewers.

What would be a valid definition then? Because looking at google scholar, I saw it utilized a few times, but not in terms of media so I'm not sure where you're deriving your definition. In lieu of that, I looked up the most popular definition since that's likely what most people are referring to when they talk about it.

It's not on Google scholar because it's not an actual thing.

Okay. I'm sure that's a thing that happens.

But not in the more popular shows that get accused for it. Supernatural?? Teen Wolf??? No. I ship things in them but intentional subtext? No...

I haven't seen Sherlock so I don't have an opinion there.

But freaking Teen Wolf? Homoerotic subtext? Sterek? -laughs for a million years-

Not Sterek specifically, but I do think there's an argument to be made for Stiles by himself being used for queerbaiting. There's been several jokes - completely unrelated to Derek or Scott - made about Stiles having bisexual inclinations, right from early on in the first season before Sterek became a thing, that the other not-gay dudes don't get. I find it weird because I'm pretty sure they're never going anywhere with it but it keeps happening.

ayrt

That alone I can agree with.

You know what? I agree with you. Being 'mistaken for gay/a gay couple' has been a comedy trope since ever. It's stupid, but it's not "queerbaiting".
I think a legitimate example of "queerbaiting" would be a show's creator introducing a character that seems like a queer character, but eventually just making them straight. Can't think of any examples off the top of my head though.

sa
Also, I only ever see "queerbaiting" outrage over popular slash pairings. No one seems to care that homoerotic subtext has been played up with Homer and Flanders in the Simpsons, for example.

I'm gay and I agree tbh. I think fans sometimes have a point (not often), but tumblr will call "queerbaiting" over every fucking interaction between two people of the same gender. I swear to God that you would think most of them must have never had a close friend (or even just a regular friend) judging by some of the things they deem to be queerbaiting.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only