You can't shoehorn queerness into your art as an afterthought and call it diversity, or imply same-sex attraction only to mock it.
Two characters meet each other's gaze. The camera cuts between their full, telling eyes. It's clear they're having a moment.
It's intimate, it looks like love, but it's a trick of the light. When television studios respond to the public push for diversity and inclusive representation, sometimes, rather than creating equal opportunity romances, a TV show plays fast and loose, hinting at a same-sex relationship without ever actualizing it on screen. Teasing the possibility of two fan favorites falling in love with each other is an old, easy trick to boost viewership, but leading on an audience that's looking for valid LGBTQ representation is queer-baiting.
By hinting at a same-sex attraction but never legitimizing the relationship, TV shows, books, and films imply that queer relationships are unsuitable for mainstream media. With the politics of queer identity already burdened with a history of criminalization, persecutory violence, and erasure from culture, trivializing queerness as bait for higher ratings is adding insult to injury. Why not just depict a non-heterosexual romance? Well, doing so risks alienating conservative audiences who won't support franchises with progressive politics. So instead, queer-baiting balances implied same-sex attraction with frank mockery of gayness.
The CW's Supernatural is one of the longest-running scripted U.S. primetime series and enjoys one of the most active fandoms in pop culture. In fact, Supernatural fans were named the Best Fandom of 2018 by TV Guide. As a show that's centered on the bond between two brothers, Sam and Dean Winchester (Jensen Ackles and Jared Padalecki), its 14 seasons have a unique emphasis on the intimacy of male bonds (so much so that a faction of fans support the brothers developing an incestuous relationship).
But for the past 10 years, a driving force of the fandom is the unrequited attraction between Dean and his "best friend" Castiel (Misha Collins). After the latter's introduction in season 4, fans raved about Dean and Castiel's chemistry on screen. In response, the writers leaned into fans' love of "Destiel" slash fiction and injected plenty of playful banter with homoerotic subtext into their dynamic. This was funny until it wasn't, with Dean's casual brush offs of "no chick-flick moments" taking on unsettling anti-gay undertones as the show became more blatant in its queer subtext, to the point that the characters developed a meta-awareness of their fans' desire for a "Destiel" coupling. In season 10's episode "Slash Fiction," a young Supernatural fan confronts Dean, "You can't have subtext without S-E-X" (yes, seriously).
Castiel (Misha Collins) and Dean Winchester (Jensen Ackles)CW
Jensen Ackles and Misha CollinsSpoiler TV
On the flip side, there's J.K. Rowling's style of queerbaiting, which is more transparent. In attempts to appeal to a wider fanbase, she's prone to spontaneously re-interpreting Harry Potter canon to suggest there's diverse LGBTQ and POC representation—despite no real attention to experiences of queerness or people of color. Following the last Harry Potter film, Rowling's pot-stirring takes have included: Albus Dumbledore is gay, Voldemort's pet snake Nagini is actually a female Asian slave under a curse, and, most recently, Dumbledore and Grindelwald shared a "love relationship."
Obviously, there are other real-world blights on the LGBTQ community that have more urgency than unseemly television. But the media's representation of queerness seeps into public consciousness in a real way too, and those portrayals are still fraught with problems. The push for more inclusive representation is only undermined by queer-baiting, as if "Queer-baiting In Hollywood Is the New 'I Have a Black Friend'" trope. Creators like J.K. Rowling can't shoehorn queerness into their art as an afterthought and call it diversity. Supernatural can't dabble with same-sex attraction and at the same time treat it as a joke. Even if it isn't cruelly intended, it's careless, dismissive, and demeaning.
POP⚡DUST | Read More...
- JK Rowling Accused Of Queer-Baiting Using Dumbledore ›
- What Is 'Queerbaiting' and Why Is J.K. Rowling One of the Worst ... ›
- The Harry Potter universe still can't translate its gay subtext to text ... ›
- Why is J.K. Rowling okay with queerbaiting fans in Fantastic Beasts 2? ›
- J.K. Rowling's Queerbaiting Is Ruining the 'Fantastic Beasts' Franchise ›
- Harry Potter and the Possible Queerbaiting: why fans are mad over ... ›
- Harry Potter and the History of Queerbaiting | The Mary Sue ›
- J.K. Rowling's Queerbaiting: 'Fantastic Beasts' Needs Gay ... ›
Bandcamp is waiving revenue shares today, and you should support POC artists.
Today is another Bandcamp Friday, meaning until midnight tonight, the platform will be waiving revenue shares and letting artists take 100 percent of profits.
Now more than ever, as Black Lives Matter protests occur around the world, it's extremely important to lift marginalized voices. The music industry has repeatedly erased Black voices throughout history, despite the fact that most mainstream genres were invented by Black people.
Now that Dumbledore and Grindelwald's "incredibly intense" romance is canon, what will JK Rowling make up next?
Every Potterhead has a favorite scene from their favorite book/movie series – the first time Harry Potter catches the Golden Snitch, the part where Dobby holds a sock, the torrid sexual affair between Dumbledore and Grindelwald.
Or wait, did that last one not happen in the books? Or the movies? Or even the Fantastic Beasts spin-off featuring Grindelwald? Was there seriously no mention of either of those characters' sexualities anywhere across the entire Harry Potter canon?
Once again, JK Rowling has offered unprompted insight into Dumbledore's sexuality, this time through comments on the Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald Blu-ray feature where Rowling assured everyone that "their relationship was incredibly intense. It was passionate, and it was a love relationship."
On the one hand, LGBTQ representation is excellent. On the other hand, if LGBTQ representation was actually important to JK Rowling, why were Dumbledore and Grindelwald's relationship/sexualities not mentioned in the spin-off, let alone the books or movies? JK Rowling limiting these character insights to tweets and Blu-ray commentary makes it seem like she wants a point for "representation" and "diversity" within her work without actually writing anything to make those characters representative. In other words, it's cowardly.
Fans are responding in turn, pointing out that this is in no way, shape, or form actual representation.
But others are just wondering what other sexual preferences JK Rowling might retroactively reveal about her beloved characters.
For instance, could Dumbledore's Patronus be changed to something more representative of his apparent newfound sexuality?
Yeah, sure why not. But what's Hagrid into?
Somehow that actually makes a lot of sense. How about Sirius?
Oh, no wonder he turns into a dog. More representation is still needed though.
JK Rowling needs to get on canonizing all of this ASAP.
Okay, we knew that one already. Personally, though, I just want to know more about Dobby's sex life.
Love it. Can't wait for JK Rowling to make all these official.
Until then, maybe she should start working on a new spin-off novel about the Dumbledore/Grindelwald relationship to, you know, utilize that content in a way that actually matters.
POP⚡DUST | Read More...
- Dumbledore's sexuality in Fantastic Beasts Crimes of Grindelwald ... ›
- Jude Law Discusses Dumbledore's Sexuality in Fantastic Beasts | E ... ›
- Albus Dumbledore's sexuality - A Harry Potter and Fantastic Beasts ... ›
- Dumbledore's sexuality is "clear" in 'Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of ... ›
- Dumbledore's Sexuality Is More Complicated Than It Sounds In ... ›
- Rowling Lets Dumbledore Out of the Closet - ABC News ›
- J K Rowling on Dumbledore's Sexuality in Fantastic Beasts | Time ›