There has been both continuity and change in the use of Queerbaiting and Queercoding in American pop culture. In current American pop culture, Queerbaiting and Queercoding are commonly used to vilify characters and create shallow representations for the Queer community to be baited on and consume. Roman Sionis, the villain from the 2019 film 'Birds of Prey’, while not being presented as explicitly Gay, is shown to have effeminate characteristics and common Gay stereotypes such as vanity, style, and misogyny. The Queercoding of Sionis is emphasised by a quote from the character's heterosexual actor Ewan MacGregor who stated that he is 'More than likely, yes.” Gay.
Despite the Queercoding in ‘Birds of Prey’, there is a contemporary trend in American film toward positive representation of Queer people, coinciding with more diversity in pop culture production. Films such as ‘Moonlight’ (2016) and ‘Love, Simon’ (2018) [although it does have problematic aspects] contain positive representations of Queer people being a part of the production. The concept of Queercoding originated in America during the 1920s. During the 1920s in America, there was the ‘pansy craze’ where Drag and Queer culture was popular entertainment in theatre and clubs. This controversial entertainment mixed with the increasing popularity of film drew concerns over the impact of perceived unethical themes in film on people. These concerns created a ‘moral panic’ that resulted in stakeholder groups lobbying for government regulation of cinema. To appease the stakeholders and escape criticism, Hollywood developed their system, the ‘Motion Picture Production Code’ or ‘Hays Code’(1930). The code, among many other articles, restricted the explicit presence of ‘sexual perversion’ - an umbrella term that included LGBTQIA+.
Save your time!
We can take care of your essay
- Proper editing and formatting
- Free revision, title page, and bibliography
- Flexible prices and money-back guarantee
After the introduction of the code, the only way producers could include LGBTQIA+ characters was to ‘code’ them with Queer characteristics to signal that they were Queer. Along with not being allowed to be explicit with Queerness, the characters could only be presented negatively, as either the villain or the victim. The stereotype of the effeminate Queer man or ‘sissy’ was and continues to be applied in pop culture. The trope is described as an “extremely effeminate boulevardier type sporting lipstick, rouge, a trim mustache and hairstyle, and an equally trim suit, incomplete without a boutonniere.” The perceived ‘Queer’ attributes by the audience are not inherently negative but are seen that way due to the attributes being linked to Queerness, and Queerness being linked to villainy. Queercoding is an easy way to establish character roles, the effeminate Queer villain is often contrasted with the hyper-masculine male hero, symbolizing heterosexuality as good and Queerness as evil.
An example of Queercoding that complied with the code is the film 'Rebel Without a Cause (1955). The Hays Code ended in 1968, due to the popularity of restricted films in foreign markets, but the 38 years it was in place had a lasting impact on how LGBTQIA+ people were represented in pop culture, creating lasting stereotypes and linking Queerness with evil. Pop culture from the Hays Code era informed the next generation's views and creation of pop culture and continues to this day. Unlike Queercoding, Queerbaiting is exclusively negative as it enables the lack of Queer visibility in pop culture, exploits the LGBTQIA+ community, and furthers inequality.
The reaction to Queerbaiting and Queercoding has changed since the 1920s, the development of technology and social media has impacted how audiences interact with pop culture. There have been social movements on social media that have created open discussions, critiques, and analyses of pop culture. These movements have created expectations for Queer representation and have held Queerbaiting offenders accountable. Moreover, this societal change is exemplified by the response to the 'Harry Potter' author J.K. Rowlings decision to exclude any explicit mention of the character Dumbledore’s sexuality in film adaptations which Rowling was screenwriting. Many people across social media called out and criticized J.K. Rowling’s gaslighting and performative representation that she promised. This can be seen in a Tweet from Twitter user Eric D. Snider on March 17, 2019 “J.K. Rowling Confirms Some Characters in Her Books and Movies Are Gay Everywhere Except in the Books or the Movies”.
The change from 2007 to 2020 in the Queer community's expectations for representation is demonstrated by Dumbledore's sexuality. In 2007, it was received as a significant improvement in Queer representation.
Disney and Gaysploitation
Queerbaiting and Queercoding are still used in pop culture in modern society due to its effectiveness. Queer communities continue to support false promises of Queer representation, and companies continue to profit off of it.
“Queer content from media representation is a commercial product in the media industry. Queerbaiting demonstrates that the Queer culture is commodified for increasing the viewership as the products. The producers in the contemporary media landscape capitalize on the topicality of Queerness”. This exemplifies the main reason why Queerbaiting still exists in popular culture. It all comes down to consumerism. Studios want the most amount of money to be made from any product they produce, they do not want to alienate a portion of their potential consumers. China and Saudi Arabia are both infamous for the censoring of Queer content in films. This censoring tells Queer audiences that the representation in the film is not needed, it is added to appease and for profit, it is not valued.
Queerbaiting is not a clear term, the level of Queerbaiting in Pop Culture is determined largely by the expectations of Queer audiences. For example, The Walt Disney Company marketed the 2017 Beauty and the Beast’ live-action remake as having the first Gay character. But the only times this was made explicit on camera was in the final scene when the proposed Gay character, Lefou (played by heterosexual actor Josh Gad), dances with another man for a 3-second scene. This was widely seen as egregious Queerbaiting mainly because of the marketing and expectations of the audience. If the part was not played up it would have been marked as an improvement in the representation of Queer people in Disney films and American pop culture. The use of Queerness as a marketing tactic reduces Queerness to a costume to perform in. The misuse can disrespect and damage Queer people who have been marginalized, and discriminated against for their sexual orientation.
Disney is also infamous for its use of Queercoding as visual shorthand to establish their villains, for example, Captain Hook from ‘Peter Pan’. A film technique developed during the Hays Code era. Many of Disney’s villains are extremely popular in Queer communities, and when a new animated film is announced, one of the most anticipated aspects of the film is the villain. Disney has built a business off their Queercoded ‘villains’ brand, with films, merchandise, and wider pop culture being developed for it. They actively commercialize Queerness for their benefit while demonizing stereotypes attributed to Queer people. Yet, Queer people continue to support Disney’s exploitation.
An explanation for the continued support of Disney’s Queercoding and Queerbaiting by Queer people is the social theory of ‘Social Surrogacy’. The theory explains that consumers develop connections with characters and people in pop culture through technology to satisfy social needs and generate the experience of belonging. This applies to Queer people especially, as they may be looking for representation in pop culture. The theory explains that they would be more likely to consume pop culture that includes people they identify with, or are promised to identify with. Companies, like Disney, will exploit the identification with Queer characters that many Queer people feel. Even if Queerness isn't explicitly shown, the characters and figures in pop culture will be defended because of the one-sided relationships formed by Queer people. Thus, companies, like Disney, can continue Queerbaiting and Queercoding as Queer people are actively supporting it.
Despite public movements on social media for better Queer representation, modern progress towards it, and condemnation of pop culture that uses it, Queerbaiting and Queercoding continue to be practiced. This is due to its effectiveness in drawing in a Queer audience. LGBTQIA+ people will support pop culture with any mention of Queer representation, even when it doesn't live up to its claims, due to a lack of precedence in positive representation. This cycle of behavior benefits the corporations, marketers, and merchandisers but is detrimental to the Queer community. This search for mainstream representation can also be pernicious to independent representation that is ignored. The largest LGBTQIA+ film to be released in recent memory was 2018’s ‘Love, Simon’ touted as the ‘first LGBTQIA+ rom-com’ - which is entirely false. The film has been supported by the Queer community as a positive LGBTQIA+ representation in the mainstream. However, people often overlook the negative effects of the film; It depicts the main Gay character, played by straight actor Nick Robinson, belittling another Gay character, played by Gay actor Clark Moore, for being too feminine - this is never addressed. The film presents coming out as LGBTQIA+ as easy and only stopped by adolescent anxiety, with the main character pressuring his love interest into coming out through an ultimatum. Moreover, the film presents a common trope in Queer media where the Gay character won’t prescribe to Gay stereotypes or be feminine because they are ‘not that type of Gay’, insinuating that Gay people who do fall under stereotypes are the wrong ‘type’ of Gay. This is a heteronormative view of Queerness that shames Gay people. On the other hand, it does show positive Queer relationships and friendships, but its basis in fantasy ignores real issues that need to be delved into and given more depth. These elements make ‘Love, Simon’ a bittersweet piece of LGBTQIA+ media. It is further evidence that Queer mainstream media will always be a palatable version that the heterosexual majority can easily digest, be marketed for, and achieve the largest profit, whether it negatively affects the communities it builds off or not.
Despite the common use of Queercoding and Queerbaiting, the concepts are not known or understood by the majority of people even in the Queer community, making the marketing tactics of companies even more effective. In an anonymous survey, 50 people were asked if they knew what Queerbaiting and Queercoding was and how that is seen in pop culture. 40% of people knew what Queerbaiting is, with 6.7% maybe knowing it, and 53.3% not knowing what it is. 23.3% knew what Queercoding was, 3.3% maybe knew what it was, and 73.3% did not know what it was.
This lack of widespread knowledge makes the practice of Queerbaiting and Queercoding easy for companies, they can continue to profit off of the Queer community while the majority of Queer people don’t realize.
Gay Porn: For Women
Queer representation will inherently be different in Japan when compared to America, due to differing contexts, values, beliefs, and cultural development. There is evidence of Queer people and relationships dating back to the 11th century. But due to Westernisation and the introduction of European values in Japan came discrimination against Queer people. Under this influence the Meiji Constitution was established in 1890, it enforced a traditional family structure that excluded and condemned Gay men. Queer women were not affected by the constitution. The constitution was later abolished after WW2, but its impacts, along with Westernisation, can be seen in the contemporary discrimination against and exclusion of Queer people in Japan.
Japanese pop culture reflects this exclusion of Queer people, as the majority of it is noninclusive, and the only genres of pop culture that are inclusive are created by and for heterosexual people, focusing on exotified, over-sexualized, homoerotic relationships; Yaoi(Boys love) and Yuri(Girls love).
Yaoi and Yuri do not Queerbait as they are for the most part not made for or by Queer people, but they do employ Queercoding to exploit the Queer community. This Queercoding is seen in the ambiguous nature of most Queer characters and relationships in Japanese pop culture, influenced by Japanese social and cultural values. In Japan there are no federal anti-discrimination laws, and same-sex marriage is not legal (although certain cities have provided ‘partnership certificates’). But Japan is a country that values nationalism, and collectivism, while perceiving individuality and the expression of emotions as a way to draw attention to difference, counter to Japanese collectivism. The values create prejudice against Queer characters, themes, and relationships as they are regarded as personal topics to be kept private, to not draw attention to differences. Thus, the current consensus seems to be that Queer culture is tolerated, so long as it stays segregated and does not disturb the majority.
Yaoi allows for Queer visibility in pop culture, but it often depicts unrealistic and unrepresentative relationships between men. A common trope in Yaoi is sexual assault. This is due to Yaoi being created by non-Queer women who have never experienced being a Queer man. Yaoi is, for the most part, the only Gay representation that exists in mainstream Japanese pop culture. This being the only source of knowledge shapes the way pop culture presents Queer people, but also how people think of Queer people. To many people, the LGBTQIA+ identity is only a fantasy, not a reality.
Queer Relationships in Yaoi mostly mirror traditional heteronormative gender roles, one man will be inexperienced and passive (Uke) while the other will be aggressive, experienced, and often older (Seme). The characters are also often designed androgynously, in line with Queercoding, so women can experience the show vicariously through them, once again emphasizing that this is not media made by or for Queer men but by and for women.
Heterosexual female Yaoi consumers and creators say that they are drawn to Yaoi due to the male characters that allow them to avoid misogyny, female stereotypes, and mistreatment of women in other pop cultures. They also argue that it is escapism from societal norms and expectations for women. But the problem with this reasoning is that it ignores the struggles of actual Queer people, othering Queer men and exotifying them for entertainment and use of women. But most importantly women are using Yaoi, the exploitation of Queer men, for profit. According to a recent survey conducted by the Yano Research Institute, the Yaoi market generated 2.2 billion yen (AUD 29,211,930.88) in sales in 2010, with no downward trends predicted.
Yuri (Girls Love) has a demographic that is much more varied when compared to Yaoi, but it is still largely made by and for heterosexual men. There are positive Yuri like the 2012 manga Citrus and its 2018 anime adaptation. Both the manga and anime were popular and well-received by Queer audiences, but there were criticisms of the apparent increase in sexual aggression from one of the main characters in the anime. This demonstrates the problem with Yuri similar to Yaoi; heterosexual men do not know what it is like to be a Queer person. Though being Queer is not a requirement for producing positive Queer representation, it is inherently going to be more honest and realistic than from heterosexual creators. In the creation of Yuri, they employ negative Lesbian stereotypes that exploit the Queer community and commonly oversexualise the female characters. Queer women in Japan are nearly invisible, the only representation in pop culture they receive is for the entertainment of heterosexual men. Furthermore, unlike Yaoi, Yuri has less impact on public perceptions of Queer women due to its niche nature.
A reason for the continuity of Yaoi and Yuri in Japanese pop culture is the intense fan culture surrounding it. In Japanese pop culture, LGBTQIA+ people are for the most part presented as jokes or over-sexualised instruments for heterosexual entertainment. However, similar to the West, there is a contemporary trend toward more positive inclusive representation that goes beyond the confines of Yaoi and Yuri.
Positive representation beyond Yaoi exists in the ongoing anime ‘JoJo’s Bizarre Adventure’. The series villain, Dio Brando, is canonically Bisexual and has a relationship with another character ‘Pucci’. The characters were shown to be both naked near a bed and have great appreciation and love for each other, but no physical intimacy. In the wider show, there is homoerotic subtext and innumerable Queer allusions. The show is far from revolutionary in its representation, as it falls into the common trap of having Queer characters and relationships but not confirming them or showing any physical intimacy. Especially in comparison to heterosexual relationships in the show that do involve physical intimacy. ‘Jojo’ is not a part of the Yaoi genre, it is a Shounen anime - it is specifically targeted at young boys. This makes the inclusion of Queer characters surprising and possibly demonstrative of a trend towards more Queer visibility in pop culture marketed for males.
Another example of, mostly, positive representation is the 2016 anime ‘Yuri!!! On Ice’ shows a Gay relationship between two professional male figure skaters, Yuri Katsuki and Victor Nikiforov. The show was lauded as a step forward for Queer representation in pop culture and was immensely popular on the social media platform Twitter. However, just like ‘Jojo’ the show, and even the creator, refuse to acknowledge that they are in a physically intimate relationship. It is more explicit than other anime and presents the relationship between the characters positively. The show can also be considered Yaoi due to its central relationship and author by a heterosexual woman, but it is rarely regarded as such. The show censors its relationship, seen near the end of the show when the two characters embrace, this is often judged as a kiss but was never confirmed by the creator, Kubo Mitsurou. This has caused consumers to accuse the show of Queerbaiting. The creator has said that the lack of confirmation over the kiss is because she wanted to leave the relationship between the characters ambiguous, as stated in a tweet on December 8, 2016 “In the end, we’re not going to tell anyone what to think, or rather, compel anyone to interpret it in a certain way. So please decide it for yourself.”
The debate ‘kiss’ between Yuri and Victor is obscured by Victor’s arm. Virtually the only positive, explicit Queer relationship between two men can be seen in the 2003 novel series turned manga and anime (2011), No. 6, teenager Shion discovers that the government is brainwashing the population and performing experiments on a nature spirit. Shion is saved from government imprisonment by Nezumi, a boy his age. Throughout the series, Shion and Nezumi work together against the government and develop a romantic relationship that leads to confirmed physical intimacy between them. The show is the first to have an in-depth Queer relationship between two men that isn't exploitative through Queercoding or baiting or based on heteronormative gender roles. Anime is saturated with over-sexualized content, yet Queer characters and relationships live in ambiguity.
Stuck on your essay?
