[ SECRET POST #2804 ]

[case]

⌈ 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.

Comments

[arcadiaego]

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.

[(Anonymous)]

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.

[(Anonymous)]

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.

[(Anonymous)]

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.

[(Anonymous)]

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.

[(Anonymous)]

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

[(Anonymous)]

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-

[darkmanifest]

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.

[(Anonymous)]

ayrt

That alone I can agree with.

[(Anonymous)]

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.

[(Anonymous)]

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.