Queerbating: is it okay for mainstream fiction to lead on LGBTQ+ audience?

[Thorn Wilde]

16 hours ago, Krista said:

I don't think less of her work within the Harry Potter series and her entire world. She is a gifted author. I'm not going to boycott her just because I think she is guilty of queerbaiting either. 

Me neither. I am going to boycott her for supporting transphobes, though. Just since we're on the topic of boycott.

Edited December 21, 2019 by Thorn Wilde

[BigBen]

On 12/21/2019 at 12:09 PM, W_L said:

Tolkien never calls the relationships of men fighting together in war and being tied forever afterward homosexual in name, but he does note that the relationship is by its nature stronger than bonds of (heterosexual) marriage.

This is a common trope in the thinking of classical antiquity, with which Tolkien had to have been familiar.  Montaigne's famous essay on friendship makes a similar point.  He speculates that no married couple could ever be as close as he and Etienne de la Boëtie were, because sexual relations and raising children were distractions that prevented mixed-sex couples from achieving that degree of closeness.  (This is actually an echo of something Plato wrote in "The Republic" about finding the other half of oneself.)  On the other hand, it's hard to read that essay in light of our current understanding of sexuality, without seeing it as a gay love letter to his deceased friend.  Whether the relationship was or was not a sexual one, it is clear they loved each other deeply.  Why they felt so close to each other and not to their wives is something Montaigne is trying to figure out by writing the essay.

[Thorn Wilde]

10 hours ago, BigBen said:

This is a common trope in the thinking of classical antiquity, with which Tolkien had to have been familiar.  Montaigne's famous essay on friendship makes a similar point.  He speculates that no married couple could ever be as close as he and Etienne de la Boëtie were, because sexual relations and raising children were distractions that prevented mixed-sex couples from achieving that degree of closeness.  (This is actually an echo of something Plato wrote in "The Republic" about finding the other half of oneself.)  On the other hand, it's hard to read that essay in light of our current understanding of sexuality, without seeing it as a gay love letter to his deceased friend.  Whether the relationship was or was not a sexual one, it is clear they loved each other deeply.  Why they felt so close to each other and not to their wives is something Montaigne is trying to figure out by writing the essay.

I would like to point out that sex is not necessarily a prerequisite for a romantic relationship.  

[BKWildenberg]

Hi! New here, but wanted to chime in because I feel like I've been talking about this a lot in real life...

My biggest issue with queerbaiting is the extent to which filmmakers have been doing it lately in interviews, press, junkets, etc. And then when a movie finally comes out, it's either erased or completely minor. 

Exhibit A: Basically every Disney brand for the last two years. Marvel made a huge deal out of an explicitly gay character (the straight director in a cameo). I guess it's nice that we were thought of? 

Beauty and the Beast's "exclusively gay moment" consisted of prolonged eye contact, and we heard so much buzz before that movie came out. Again, it amounted to nothing, and could have easily be played off as something else. 

Star Wars did this A LOT for the most recent movie. Almost every interview with Oscar Issac and John Boyega was flirty, suggestive, and hinted at something more for their characters. The actors repeatedly talked about how they wanted it, how it felt natural with the storyline, and their natural chemistry on set... 

...and then the movie actually came out, with absolutely none of that (minus a 1.5 second kiss between background characters) and then the narrative was switched to how they actors "wished" that would have happened, but it never materialized. 

Pushing the narrative for the sake of PR, but not actually following through keeps happening but it looks like folks are starting to catch on. And I hate the "well these have to be marketed in China" excuse, but the US has enough issues without pointing fingers at other countries. 

[Krista]

I think a lot of that come from the fact that we demand inclusivity and diversity in 'everything,' or we decide we're going to boycott it. I do feel we've become our own worst enemy. These companies aren't blameless either though. The little segments that are supposed to satiate the, "everything has to be inclusive," crowd has only backfired. It is annoying for something to be hyped as ground breaking or whatever and it be so obscure and insignificant that there was really no point in having it in there in the first place.

I think we're going to have to get over ourselves though. We can demand to be represented more, but we have to also be willing to accept that some films, shows, and books doesn't have a place for that sort of representation either and doing so hinders and restricts the makers. I wouldn't want the pressure to be on me, it would be a worry for me as a creator to attempt to suit everyone just so there isn't some sort of unjust outcry for my work to be censored or boycotted for whatever reason.

There are industries out there that will represent what you wish to have represented, you just have to go find them and support them. Give them feedback to help them, etc. That is why I love Indy films over mainstream films any day.