Oh context.

I actually think the show genuinely wanted to casually have a moment where Betty acknowledged an attraction to a woman, with no judgement from Veronica - and to not treat it like a big deal. But putting that line from Veronica in the trailer (completely out of context) just fully 180′ed that scene into harmful queerbait.

If you never saw that promo, the scene might have landed better instead of being massive queerbait. Including it in the promo really implied it would be a plot for Betty, but it was literally a throwaway line. They messed up so badly, but I actually think they thought they were being progressive when they wrote this moment for Betty. Riverdale really takes one step forward and 15 back 🤦

I cannot believe this scene happened and Betty and Veronica didn’t talk about their kiss PLZ

VIDEO ESSAYS PT 3.1 (PT 3.2 / PT 2 / PT 1) 

A Monstress Comes of Age: Horror & Girlhood Jennifer's Body & the Horror of Bad Marketing The Redemption of JENNIFER'S BODY

Tracing the Roots of Pop Culture Transphobia Society and Queer Horror Monsters in the Closet - A History of LGBT Representation in Horror Cinema Evil Queens: A Queer Look at Disney History

Beyond Nonbinary Everyone is Attracted to Nonbinary People Bisexual is Pansexual is Bisexual The Bi-Cycle (and Why It's So Confusing) The Problem With Queerbaiting

Boys Don't Cry (Except When They Do) What Even Is Masculinity? (According to Cinema) Predatory Romance in Harrison Ford Movies The Men Who Couldn't Stop Crying, and Other Unbearable Realities

Lord Of The Rings: How Music Elevates Story Why the Soundtrack to Shrek is Actually Genius The Impact of Diary of a Wimpy Kid Charlie's Angels — How Gender Obsession Can Ruin a Film Why Megamind is a Subversive Masterpiece Taika Waititi: Mastering Happy Sad Cinema AMERICAN PSYCHO: How a box office failure became the most important film of a generation Design Crit: Business cards from American Psycho Shiva Baby, sugar babies & the paradox of sexual liberation The Dumbest Way To Fight A War | The Tomorrow War How Aladdin Changed Animation (by Screwing Over Robin Williams) In The Moment: A 1917 Video Essay Chernobyl - A Masterclass in Perspective Who Framed Roger Rabbit - The 3 Rules of Living Animation Eighth Grade: how Bo Burnham captures the tween experience Tenet - A Misunderstood Masterpiece Disney's Robin Hood and the Death of Color Why Luca Is Better Than You Think Mainstream: Andrew Garfield’s Beautiful Mess of a Film The Problem With Tarzan Passengers, Rearranged The Art of Editing and Suicide Squad The Art of Storytelling and The Book of Henry Pirates of the Caribbean - Accidentally Genius A Lukewarm Defence of Fifty Shades of Grey Riverdale: The Biggest Anomaly in TV History Se7en — Why Less Is More School of Rock's Perfect Scene

hey friend, i mean this genuinely, but what's overtly romantic about Crowley and Aziraphale's relationship? maybe I'm not remembering a scene, but what does the show do that shows them being obviously romantic with each other? to me, the soundtrack including a "romantic" song while they eat lunch isn't really enough, as a lot of mid-2000s queerbaiting shows did similar things to wink at queer audiences in a way that cishets wouldn't notice.

Hi friend. Thank you for asking. I’ll try to explain my thoughts best as I can.

Here’s why I don't read Aziraphale and Crowley as queerbaiting: usually when queerbaiting happens, there's something used to suggest a queer relationship (a line, a scene, certain framing, marketing decisions - a wink and you'll miss it moment like you said) to entice queer audiences to watch and consume the media, and then afterwards a moment that explicitly goes back on that and denies it.

My understanding is that the point of queerbaiting is literally to bait audiences to watch. It's an unfulfilled promise of delivering content that people want to see that the media has no true desire to follow through with. It's to pretend to cater to an audience in order to gain that audience without actually delivering what they want.

Ex. Riverdale specifically cutting a trailer to include a scene of the two main girls kissing so that people would see the trailer, assume it means the show is going to explore a queer relationship with those characters, only for it to be revealed when the show actually airs that that scene truly meant nothing and was just a one-off moment to entice a certain audience. (I might be wrong on this, I don't actually watch Riverdale but this is what I gathered from Tumblr.)

Ex. Supernatural having moments between Dean and Cas that read as incredibly romantic, only to then follow up with a million moments that directly contradict that reading. Dean directly saying, "You're our brother, Cas" after a scene that got read as romantic. Etc. etc.

Ex. Marvel including blink-and-you’ll-miss-it representation to keep a certain audience loyal and tuning into their media under the guise that they’re supportive allies without ever actually focusing on queer stories.

To me, Good Omens never did that. It never had that moment that went "oh no, you're reading this wrong." It never denied or contradicted or went back on anything that suggested romantic feelings between Crowley and Aziraphale.

I feel like their relationship is treated with respect in the show. It's treated as important. It is the center of the show and arguably the most important relationship in the entire narrative, even though, importantly to note, Good Omens is NOT a romance. It is a story about stopping the apocalypse first and foremost, not just about Crowley and Aziraphale and their relationship. The main themes are about choosing your own fate and the relationships in the show directly relate to that (Adam choosing the Them, Newt/Anathema getting together initially because of a prophecy and Anathema then making the decision to stay with him after a book is no longer telling her what to do, and Crowley and Aziraphale choosing each other when their nature tells them they shouldn't.)

But Az/Crowley's relationship is still framed romantically. Think of the way moments between them are shot and edited. The music choices not just at the end but throughout the whole piece. The scene where Crowley saves the books and significant time is spent focusing on Aziraphale's reaction. The scene between them in the car. Them choosing each other in the end over everything. The way they look at each other and the way the editing handles that.

If Az/Crowley were a man and a woman, no one would think twice about labeling their relationship as romantic even without explicit "I love yous" or a kiss or sex. And granted, yes that happens with other media that is used as queerbaiting. BUT again, the most significant thing to me is that nothing in the text ever goes against the idea that they are in love. There's not one moment where they go "no, no I don't feel that way, he's just a friend" or anything else to contradict a romantic reading. The editing, the writing, the music choices, the way scenes are framed, the filmmaking in general is all very deliberate and at no point does it ever suggest that you SHOULDN'T interpret it romantically. (And frankly, I am a huge supporter of the idea that media is getting too lazy with it's visual storytelling and that MORE things should be shown purely through the filmmaking rather than dialogue. I think that framing their relationship the way they do is stronger than an "i love you" in dialogue without doing the work in the filmmaking, but that's a topic for another time.)

And those filmmaking choices were used deliberately from start to finish, all the way to the ending scene of them at lunch together.

I do want to say that I absolutely understand the reason why people felt let down. People want desperately to see themselves and their experiences represented in media, and there has been too long of a history of media promising something that people desperately latch onto only for it to not be sincere. And because of that, people want things to be expressed in media so explicitly that it can't be denied. I absolutely understand that. I just don't think that that always means that things have to be directly spoken in dialogue or confirmed with the things we think they need to be confirmed with (sex/kissing). I think film and tv can include things sincerely just using film language and filmmaking choices and for it to still be real and sincere and intended.

Ultimately I guess what I'm saying is I think queerbaiting is a very specific marketing tactic that happens with the end goal of getting viewers to tune in without actually delivering on what you know they're looking for, and I just don't feel that Good Omens falls into that. I felt like I was watching a story about an important relationship that was portrayed as the Ultimate Most Important relationship in these characters life in a genuine way, not being sold a false promise that the show later explicitly denied and contradicted. I never felt like the show said "gotcha" to me or "no you were wrong for reading it that way" or "of course that's not what that meant" which always happens with queerbaiting.

I was just watching a story about the apocalypse and one important relationship in that story. And I personally felt incredibly seen and represented by how Aziraphale and Crowley's story was told. Maybe not everyone did, but I did.

Destiel is bad for mlm. An essay with comebacks.

CLARIFICATIONS BEFORE I START: DESTIEL FANS DON'T INTERACT WITH THIS OF COURSE!!! Btw, I am mlm, I have a loving boyfriend who acts like Castiel while I act like Sam a lot... so yeah, I'm a Sastiel shipper so this post may come off as a little biased but I want to help other shippers who are against Destiel.  So if you're not a Sastiel shipper, still, don't leave- I'm not forcing you to ship it. That's wrong to force someone to ship. I'm also anti-Dean person.  In this post, there will be spoilers for Supernatural.

Ight let's put this show on the road... first off...

WHY DESTIEL IS BAD: -Yes, the ship is mlm and if canon, will be a mlm ship... but it’s bad rep. Why? Because if you want good representation, you gotta have a good relationship and not be queerbait for about 12 years. Dean literally beat Castiel up multiple times (even without the Mark of Cain). Let me ask you this fellas in a relationship... do you beat your partner? Bark commands at them 24/7? See them as a monster at times? I don’t think so.

-Stepping away from the ship itself, the fans are toxic and normally straight cis women who think they know what’s good for mlm or fetishizes mlm. (However, I’m not saying everyone who ships Destiel is straight and a cis woman) Also, the Destiel shippers will often times force others to ship that ship with them.

-What is mlm fetishization? People who solely love mlm ships- they barely have any wlw ships or straight ships. Just... mlm... or forces two males together, even if they are straight. They are or the equvialent of asking a gay male to be their 'gay friend'. That is very toxic. Destielhellers... get a new hobby, something healthier than reading/watching sexual assault, emotional abuse, and physical abuse.

COMEBACKS:

-When Castiel raised Dean from hell, he didn’t do it because “he loves Dean!” It was because Castiel is a soldier, a perfect soldier too, created by God to obey orders without question. When Castiel was first introduced to the show, he didn’t understand human emotions nor actually feel them so how could he quickly love Dean? Castiel also raised from Sam from hell.

-“#Theysilencedyou” on Instagram... the CW didn’t silence you, no one did. It was never canon in the first place. If Destiel was canon in the first place and Dean says “I love you too” OUT LOUD to Castiel, then killing Castiel off and NOT GIVING Dean a happy ending would be a “they silenced you” moment. But did that really happen? No. In the end, Castiel and Dean got a happy ending, just not together. And WOAH WOAH WOAH DON'T PULL CHARLIE INTO THIS. The show does a good job of giving her a lot of screentime about her sexuality and whatnot. She got a girlfriend multiple times. Her first death... she died in a Joan of Arc kind of way too which is awesome to me- but that's not the point with Charlie. She didn't come back in the finale because of covid and it's heavily hinted that everyone in the alternative universe place did go to heaven. I bet you anything she's in heaven right now.

-Castiel’s last words were the words he said in 15x18. He was dying. The empty was getting him. Those were his dying words, if he had said those while not dying, I would understand “they silenced you” there too. But Castiel didn’t say it while NOT dying, right? Also, there are different types of meanings behind "I love you" such as the friendship kind, which I say "I love you" to a lot of my friends, there's the family kind, and yes, there's the lover kind. Castiel most likely meant it in a family way since he said- same with Dean- that the Winchester brothers were like family to him.

-The CW writers aren’t homophobic. Here’s a list of the lgbtq+ characters from their other shows:

-Sara Lance (Arrow) -Alex Danvers (Supergirl) -Clarke Griffin (The 100) -Nyssa Raatko (Arrow) -David Singh (The Flash) -Anissa Pierce (Black Lightning) -Toni Topaz (Riverdale) -Teddy Montgomery (90210) AND MORE.

Granted, there aren't many gay men in that list. That's because they haven't found an actor who would feel comfortable playing a gay man... toxic masculinity happens guys... Reminds you of a certain character in Supernatural?

-“Kill Sam/Jared!” Sadly, I’ve seen that comment. Firstly, if you kill Jared... that’s literal murder and... dude that’s so extremist... you shouldn’t wish death upon anybody. Secondly, Sam is a main character in the show. He’s Dean’s brother. If Dean was left alone with Castiel, it still wouldn’t happen. Why? Because like we saw in the finale (15x20), Sam was mourning after Dean and it left him to FOREVER remember his brother. Dean would be the same if Sam were to die and go to heaven. Dean’s and Sam’s brotherly relationship is the glue that keeps it all together in the show. One brother is very rarely without the other in screentime.

-“Sam is Destiel’s number one cheerleader!” Okay, no, I get where they get it from... the episode, Fan Fiction (10x5). But Sam was messing with Dean because he knew how squirmy he’d get. Dean sees Castiel as a brother... and imagine being shipped with your friend that you see as family. Horrible, right? because it’s getting rid of the aspects of your relationship? Sam even shipped himself with Castiel in one of the scenes. So how would that make him a cheerleader of Destiel?

-Destiel fans admitted to being queerbaited, which is bad and can lead to other shows in the future doing that. I’m gonna add the definition of queerbaiting: "a marketing technique for fiction and entertainment in which creators hint at, but then do not actually depict, same-sex romance or other LGBTQ representation." -from Wikipedia. I'm sorry but there was little queerbaiting with Destiel... because Dean would CONSTANTLY be a jerk to Castiel then we'd have like... one scene where Dean wasn't a jerk to Castiel in the episode, then never see a scene where Dean was kind to Castiel until two episodes later.

-"Dean isn’t straight!!!" Yuh he is straight, have you seen him with a man? Let alone, feel comfortable with one romantically? I'll type up all of the episodes in which he was passively homophobic later on... AND don’t push Sam into this saying some stupid stuff like “he’s homophobic!”

-“Jensen is homophobic!” I actually used to believe this until I woke up and did some research on that. How that started was by Dean, the character Jensen plays, not saying "I love you" back to Castiel/Misha. They're practically forcing the ship to happen. Jensen was just following the script, same with Misha. They're under a contract guys, they don't have much say in it. However, there have been some rumors saying Jensen is homophobic even before 15x18. I cannot confirm this but I've heard that Jensen did decline a fan's request to hold a pride flag... but there's not much context behind it because the fan themself could of been weird and creepy and harassing Jensen, or forcing Jensen to say Dean is something so he needs to hold up that pride flag. Or... yes, Jensen was lowkey being homophobic...

-Destiel fans are signing stuff to change the ending... like??? That won’t work. The cast's contract with CW is done. Also, this like the equivalent of Trump’s “STOP THE COUNT!!” and “I won the election!!!”.... changing stuff to make people believe you are right. That's hella manipulative. -[Insert that one shot of all of the crew together at the end of 15x20.] Destiel fan: "WHY WASN'T CASTIEL THERE?!! WITH DEAN IN HEAVEN?!?!!?!?!" Okay, firstly, Jack wasn't there too and he's now God, covid happens and the writers really wanted Bobby's actor to be there ((I forgot why, I'll add it in later!!! BUT THERE'S A REASON)). Mary and John Winchester could of been in that finale... there are so many characters that could of been in that finale guys, but COVID-19 happened. The lack of characters was for the actors' safety. I don't know about you but some show isn't more important than my own safety. Besides, the contract is about to be lifted, and they had other shows to act in.... Jared with Walker... Jensen with The Boys...

-"How is Destiel bad for mlm...? It's gay ship..." I already answered that question, but I just wanted to remind you guys that Destiel fans WILL ask this. But I'll sum it up for you guys: it's fetishization because you're pairing up a toxic man who sees that other person as another brother/best friend. Also, that 'toxic man' isn't bisexual. He always has been with females and makes lowkey homophobic remarks. On top of that, Dean has beaten Castiel up sooooo many times, both physically and mentally. ***This essay is a WIP... and I take constructive criticism. However, if you are a Destiel fan and write about this, I will ignore you.

Sex and Sexuality in Media

Synopsis

Oh, boy. You read the title, you know what you’re getting into. Sex! Nudity! LGBTQ+ representation! Why am I linking all of them together? Because sex sells, and I would rather keep the images attached to this safe for work, so it’s just gonna be a pride flag or two. Of course, in a less tongue and cheek way of going about it, sex and sexuality are very obviously linked and it seemed to make sense to talk about them at the same time. Go into this expecting it to be a little disjointed, as my thoughts on sex in media and sexuality in media differ drastically: namely, I think we all need to quit it with throwing unnecessary sex scenes in media. They’re overdone, uncomfortable, and generally don’t add anything to the plot or characters. There are exceptions, of course, but generally the act itself doesn’t need to be shown in order to get across whatever needs communicating. On the flip side, I adamantly support showing more diverse sexualities and relationships in media as we live in an age of queerbaiting and stereotypes, though luckily that’s changing over time. Therefore, I apologize if this seems to be two topics smashed together, as I figure these are related enough topics that I might as well talk about them at the same time even if I have opposite thoughts on them. Hey, opposites attract, so hopefully it will make sense!

Prompting Observation

This wasn’t prompted by any one particular thing that I saw recently, it’s more just a general vibe I have gotten from effectively every piece of media with a PG-13 rating or higher. Sex sells. That is a trope that is unfortunately pervasive throughout most of Western media. It’s actually quite interesting, as sex sells effectively regardless of the participants, with non straight sex being just as much of a selling point as straight sex despite the fact that non straight characters and relationships are much more “niche.” Do you know those summer blockbusters, generally the action ones, that always have the montage of clips with dramatic music playing right before the title is revealed? One of them is almost always either a sex scene, the leadup to a sex scene, or someone that is presented in such a way as to appear sexy. Even smaller projects like Riverdale include “enticing imagery” in order to get people to watch it: namely, the marketing heavily featured a scene where two of the female leads were kissing. Those two characters, of course, were just doing it for a dare in an episode and were both completely hetereosexual. Doesn’t stop the marketing teams, though. And on the topic of queer representation, consider when a show that isn’t explicitly marketed towards the LGBTQ+ community displayed any LGBTQ+ characters in their marketing? Even shows that included LGBTQ+ characters wouldn’t market them and would generally hide them until near the show’s conclusion, such as the rush of children’s shows in the mid-2010s like Adventure Time, Avatar: The Legend of Korra, and Gravity Falls. Now, those examples generally seemed to be due to the fact that the higher-ups at the broadcasting stations were limiting the creators, not that the creators themselves were just throwing it in at the end for “points,” but the fact of the matter is that those higher-ups respond to the desires of the viewers.

Essential Elements

Alright, so as it always seems to be, there are two main elements here. On the one hand with sex, there’s the fact that it’s shoehorned in there and put to the forefront despite it adding nothing to the media itself. On the other hand with LGBTQ+ representation, there’s the fact that it’s avoided like the plague and hidden away from the viewers. See? I told you that they’d come back together at the end! The main bit to take away from these two points is that, currently, the market is at two extremes and that a little bit of balance from both directions is in order. That doesn’t mean sex can’t be in media and it also doesn’t mean every character has to be gay, I feel as though those responses to the problem would be just as bad as how it is right now. There simply has to be a limit to things before they overtake the market and a support to things that are being wrongfully stifled.

Applications

The applications on this one are, frankly, rather straightforward. Creators, stop putting so much needless sex into media and start putting more queer characters in. The idea of limiting how much sex you put into a piece of media is something that, hopefully, I don’t need to get into. If you want to characters to have sex, fading to black is a tried and true way to get that message across to your audience. If there’s something that needs to happen during the act, such as a confession or a plot-driving interruption, then put the focus on that outside thing as opposed to the act itself. The audience came for the plot and characters, they don’t need you to linger on the physicality of it all. Of course, you could want to focus on the intimacy of it because that could be a part of the plot or characters- go wild. Just make sure that when you’re inserting a sex scene or whatever form of intimacy to what you’re doing, ensure it has a purpose just like everything else in the story.

On the representation side of things, that gets tricky. When you make a character who is LGBTQ+, half of the audience will be saying that it’s leftist propaganda trying to appeal to SJWs while the other half will be saying that it isn’t done correctly. That’s the same thing with strong female characters. And Person of Color characters. And really any minority. As little as it helps to say it, you really just have to suck it up and develop a thick skin. Those two “halves” of your audience will, in time, reveal themselves to be very vocal minorities. There will be some people that absolutely love that there was representation and the vast majority of people just won’t care. The major pitfall to avoid is writing into stereotypes or just saying a character is something without actually demonstrating it. As you might have noticed, these are just basic writing hurdles that you have to deal with regardless of the character’s orientation. So go ahead and write characters of diverse sexualities and treat them like characters, with their own motivations and desires. And, yes, sex can be a desire. Just make sure not to focus too much on it!

Week 14 Scrapbook: Part 3 (Queerbaiting)

Many shows and films have noticed the marketability of queer characters and have queer baited in order to get more views.

Finn and Poe (Finnpoe) from the newest Star Wars trilogy. 

Fans started shipping two after noticing their strong friendship and chemistry in the first film of the reboot series.

The actors Oscar Issac and John Boyega even shipped Finnpoe. It never happened, Disney owns the rights to the Star Wars franchise. Fans knew Disney was never going to happen but still had hope.

Lena Luthor and Kara Danvers (Supercorp) from the show Supergirl.

These two have had an undeniable chemistry since their first scene together.

The actresses have sent fans mixed signals, Melissa who plays Kara said it was nothing more than a friendship while Katie who plays Lena has encouraged Supercorp fans.

The show is now entering it’s final season and it doesn’t seem like anything more than a friendship will happen.

Regina and Emma (SwanQueen) from Once Upon a Time.

These two have also great chemistry on screen and fit the enemies to lovers trope perfectly.

The show has ended and nothing ever happened between SwanQueen even though they did raise their son Henry together. Fans still ship these two till this day and believe there was always something more.

Betty and Veronica (Beronica) from Riverdale.

Riverdale queer baited it’s audience since episode one where Betty and Veronica kiss.

Fans immediately shipped them but nothing ever happened or will happen. Especially since the show already has another WLW relationship (Choni)

Beca and Chloe (Bechloe) from Pitch Perfect.

The ship that should have happened and no one knows why it didn’t other than lazy writing and having studio execs turn it down.

Anna Kendrick and Brittany Snow the actresses who play Bechloe have shipped their characters together since the first film of the franchise.

In the last movie during their promo run, the two said they filmed a kiss and used that to promote (queerbait) their film. The kiss was cut out, disappointing many fans.

Films and shows that queerbait don’t realize how harmful it is to the queer community. There is hardly any queer representation on screen. All of these shows and films all have one thing in common, support. So many queer fans love and support these ships and characters because they feel seen all the writers have to do is develop their relationship even if it isn’t what was intended initially. I think the relationships that do get developed ended up not meeting fans expectations because the writers behind them are not queer. Networks and executives need to stop being so scared of having queer representation in their films and shows. There’s no excuse to queerbait now.