Why Byler isn't how you (typically) queerbait an audience, and why there is still hope
I've seen a lot of people expressing both doubt and fear about the future for byler, and how it will most likely be another case of queerbait. Because that's how it always turns out, even if one of them is already confirmed queer.
Let's take some shows guilty of queerbait as examples. Supernatural, Teen wolf, and What we do in the shadows (2019)
Teen wolf is especially guilty of this, with even promotion and videos of the actors appeasing to shippers to lure them in while nothing in the show ends up happening. The people working on the show knew about the shippers, knew they could use it to their advantage to get more viewers, and to keep queer people watching. This most likely, at least partially, influenced their writing.
For example, Stiles bisexual scenes, which are often played as comedic to make the audience laugh. He ends up never being confirmed to be bisexual/queer and his love interests are women.
But what about queerbait where one of them does end up being confirmed queer, which is a perfect mirror to what is currently happening with Will?
The other examples I named has at least one, if not both of the characters, confirmed as queer.
In Supernatural, Castiel confessed his love to Dean.
In What we do in the shadows, the main cast consists of queer vampires, with Guillermo later also coming out as gay and getting himself a boyfriend.
And still, these fall under queerbait. Let me just quickly explain why, or skip this part if you already know the gist of it.
Supernatural is a show that spanned over 15 whole seasons. During most of these, there was very obvious "tension" between Dean and Castiel, and even some scenes that could imply that Dean is bisexual, (though that's yet again never confirmed, and most of those scenes are also played for laughs.) Both Dean and Castiel have female love interests, with Dean having more overall than Castiel, which obviously appeases to a straight audience.
Castiel is later confirmed to have been in love with Dean, which is in episode 18 of 20 in season 15, the very last season. He does this right before he "dies," and doesn't see Dean again.
I don't know I have to explain how this is terrible writing and why it is, despite confirmation, still queerbait. You lured queer people in by leaving bread crumbs here and there, only to confirm it in one of the last episodes right before he dies, and only on Castiel's side? Queerbait and bury your gays trope, very famous. Lure them in and take the easy way out in order to minimize backlash.
What we do in the shadows follows a group of queer vampires, one of which is Nandor and his familiar, Guillermo. Guillermo has been Nandor's familiar for 10 years starting season 1. Nandor is already confirmed as queer, and Guillermo is confirmed gay in one of the later seasons.
User ufocatchers on reddit put it perfectly;
In this case, you could make the argument that them not ending up together is better, since their relationship wouldn't be stable. And the show does celebrate queerness in a very natural way, even allowing it to be sexual, mature, and not innocent and easy to digest for straight audiences. Although I have a personal gripe with how they never gave Nadja a proper female love interest despite her being attracted to women and well as men.
But why hint at them getting together in the first place? Why lead so many fans on, knowing it's what they want?
Stories about or involving queer characters can be queerbait if you're leading your audience on with false hope concerning a pairing in the show only to snuff it out in the very last season.
Now, this leads us to Stranger Things. Your fear might be rising again. What if they take the same turn as What we do in the shadows, or even as terrible as Supernatural?
Here's why I don't think this is going to happen;
It's a marketing strategy. It's meant to lure in the queers while showing clear favoritism towards the straight audience and keeping them satisfied. Queerbait is often very in your face, very famously even played for laughs so that the straight audience isn't upset by it being there. Gay jokes are pretty funny, after all.
Queerbait will often go to the lengths of calling the characters "destined to be" on top of having blatant, obvious gay moments. Sharing a bed, forced to huddle for warmth, standing very close, coming when the other calls, having intimate moments where they might even say typically romantic things.
This, of course, doesn't go ignored by the general audience. Even straight people notice how this looks, how it sounds, but they don't live under the hope that it will turn into anything. After all, in most cases, these characters still have separate love interests, are never confirmed to be queer (until, well, the very end), and hey, what if their relationship is just very brotherly?
Even in What we do in the shadows it's very obvious. It didn't take a genius to figure out what they might be hinting at.
For most queerbait ships, the reason as to why you think they're queer is always "well, just look at them."
But can you do that with Byler? Can you convince people that they're queer just by looking, or do you have to point out the evidence? Personally, I've had to explain to my queer friends why Byler is heavily implied because they didn't pick up on it.
You might already be picking up what I'm putting down, especially because of the header, but Byler is not how you bait and lure in a queer audience. We've already established that queerbait is obvious. It's not something you have to look for because that would defeat the whole point. You can't sell something that is hidden. Like Byler being completely excluded from the teaser as well as trailers in the past.
Unless you're not trying to sell it at all.
Byler is not queerbait, it's queer coding.
The very definition of queer coding is subtly hinting at a character's sexuality or gender identity without explicitly stating it within the story. This can involve implied dialogue, set design, costuming, color coding, body language and expressions. Sound familiar?
The way that Stranger Things handles Byler and their relationship is very similar. It's intricate and clearly developed with care. It involves not only dialogue, body language, and facial expressions, but also color coding, lighting, mirroring to other relationships and show, don't tell. Hell, even playlists hint at their queerness, especially Mike's.
Queer coding is also done in a way where the general audience does not pick up on it. It is only for the queer viewers, who are supposed to see themselves in the characters and put the pieces together. (I saw the tv glow is a very good example of this)
Queer coding might be done on accident (dead poets society, lord of the rings) but I don't think this is the case here, considering Will has been queer coded since season one, proving that if they can do it once, they can do it again.
Here's also some posts that go into further detail, and why I also believe they didn't accidentally queer code Byler
Why Mike and Will are written for each other
How Mike only makes sense if he's queer
The last one is especially important. How do you accidentally write a character like that? The answer is, you don't. And this is once again not how you queerbait an audience. Not with characters who don't make sense outside of a queer lens. How would this appease straight viewers, who in this case only see Mike as an asshole for no apparent reason and dislike him?
My last point is, many queer people don't watch Stranger Things because they do not believe Byler will become canon, or they don't even see the hints between them. Obviously, this can be said about many shows that are guilty of queerbaiting. Why waste your time? But I think in this case it's very telling that, if they tried to queerbait (even in the past) it was not at all successful. And maybe, just maybe, it's because they weren't trying to bait anyone at all.
