Written by Sophie Rose
Illustrated by Sylvain Chan
Harry Styles, Billie Eilish, Kit Connor – a few celebrity names who have recently been accused of a phenomenon termed ‘queerbaiting’. Harassed and publicly slated for sexual ambiguity, they have been forced to expose themselves to the world to avoid hatred from both heterosexual and LGBTQ+ communities. In attempts to become more inclusive and accepting, how has society become so extreme in our invasion of privacy, and so stuck on the very labels and stereotypes we worked hard to break down?
Sexuality as a social construct
The notion of ‘sex’ as we know it, and therefore the identities associated with it, are socially constructed, dependent on context. There is nothing objective or tangible about sexual identity, which has been agreed upon by various experts in the sociological field. While same-sex attraction has been documented as far back as the Ancient Greeks, disdain for homosexuality emerged around the 15th century. For decades, the gay rights movement has attempted to break down the idea that there is a ‘right’ and a ‘wrong’ to sexuality, and that oppression of homosexuality is acceptable. Today in the 21st century, it is largely accepted across communities that sexuality is a fluid notion. While not a conscious choice that can be actively altered or changed, it lacks the binary structure that society tried so hard to impose for centuries. So, with the most progressive view of sexuality in recent history, why are public figures being forced out of the closet? Why does the public feel entitled to the ins and outs of celebrities’ sexual lives? And how has sexuality become a spectacle for society to probe, pry and pick apart?
What is queer baiting?
The official definition of queer-baiting, as defined by Oxford Languages, is ‘the incorporation of apparently gay characters or same-sex relationships into a film, television show, etc. as a means of appealing to gay and bisexual audiences while maintaining ambiguity about the characters’ sexuality’. Essentially, queer-baiting is a marketing technique used by media producers to gain LGBTQ+ audiences, without actually offering any overt representation of these groups.
Queer-baiting allows creators to capitalise on the emotions of the queer community with the promise of queer representation, yet fails to fulfil such promises. Viewers are drawn in by the expectation that they will see a part of themselves in the characters on screen, and are left hoping for this to come to fruition. This strategy on viewership allows for producers to profit from the queer community without providing them with a substantial return. This has a high potential to invalidate LGBTQ+ experiences and sees the further erasure of queer stories from the media. It has also been linked to an increase in anxiety and depression in queer youth due to the reinforcement of heteronormativity.
One of the most notorious examples of queerbaiting in modern media can be seen in the popular British TV series, Sherlock. Many viewers point out both explicit attraction between the characters Sherlock and Watson, and implicit subtext hinting at a queer relationship, before marrying Watson off in a heterosexual relationship. While many queer Sherlock fans remain supportive of the show and indulge in the relationship beyond the formal script, it is one of the clearest uses of queerbaiting in modern media.
Life in the public eye – the absence of privacy
Despite queerbaiting’s formal definition being restricted to fictional media, social media and rising celebrity obsession has brought it into real life, attaching the label to real people.
Obsession with celebrities and parasocial relationships has been prevalent pre-social media. From the heroes of Ancient Rome to Marilyn Monroe, devotion to celebrity figures is nothing new, and has certainly not emerged due to the internet. However, its evolution has accelerated largely due to social media. From their diet and exercise, to their relationships and social routines, readers are enthralled with the ins and outs of their favourite celebrities. The growing popularity of social media sites – such as Instagram and Twitter in the 2010s – has encouraged greater celebrity obsessions, and less privacy for those in the spotlight than ever before. With social media allowing us to feel a level of relatability to celebrities, entitlement to their private lives and most notably their sexuality has become a rather large and harmful phenomenon.
In attempts to show diversity and inclusion in the public sphere, the expectation for public figures to share elements of their sexual lives is prominent. And those who are reluctant, quiet, or ambiguous are certainly not met with kindness. Singers such as Harry Styles and Billie Eilish are faced with accusations that they use their ambiguous sexuality and androgynous style for profit, in order to gain an audience and capitalise from the queer community.
However, as we previously established, the very definition of queer baiting limits its use for fictional media. So, why now is it being used for real people? Fans are accusing real people of using queerness for capital with the sudden expectation that we should know all aspects of people’s lives. The idea that we are entitled to know the sexuality of public figures sees those who lack a label or a binary being abused. This is to such an extent that people are being prematurely outed, highlighting a massive issue with society’s attempt to be more inclusive. Fan’s vain attempts at diversity exposes a deeper contradiction: by trying to embrace queer identities, the narrative has shifted from celebration to surveillance. Inclusivity has become conditional, demanding some form of proof of identity, rather than respecting privacy. A movement meant to foster liberation now risks reproducing the very pressures it sought to dismantle.
Kit Connor, star of Netflix’s hit queer show Heartstopper, came out as bisexual in October of 2022, however this was by little choice of his own. Being the subject of harassment and claims of queerbaiting, after being photographed holding hands with actress Maia Reficco, Connor wrote on Twitter:
‘Back for a minute. I’m bi. Congrats for forcing an 18 year old to out himself. I think some of you missed the point of the show. Bye.’
In the show, Connor plays a secondary-school rugby player who begins developing feelings for a fellow male classmate. The show follows the development of their relationship and the navigation of their sexuality. Some fans linked Connor’s playing of the role with the silence in his real life surrounding his sexual orientation, to accuse him of queerbaiting. Following the tweet came a rush of support and apology for the young actor; yet, this instance highlights a wider issue surrounding queer representation and experience, consequently sparking much debate.
While queerbaiting remains an important topic of conversation for fictional media, and the call for overt queer representation in film and TV is necessary, its place in real life is clearly misguided. While queer role models and stories are ever important to be present in the spotlight, it is not the place of the public to state whose stories are valid, and suggest that only those who are ‘out’ are worth listening to. Forcing celebrities to be clear and open about sexuality, despite its fluid and private nature, is an ill-advised attempt to show inclusivity and diversity. Connor’s coming out exemplifies this perfectly.
The rise of queer baiting accusations against real people reveals a troubling flaw in how society approaches inclusivity. Beginning as a term to critique fictional media, queer baiting has been weaponised against real-life individuals, forming a culture of entitlement where personal identities are treated as public property. In our search for clarity, we reduce queerness to inflexible categories. If we are to be a more inclusive society, we must allow space for ambiguity and privacy – not force premature announcements. In light of Connor’s outing, we can only hope that both heterosexual and queer communities alike adapt their attitudes and beliefs, to permit public figures the respect and acceptance they deserve.
