This may be controversial but I don’t think the saying “real people can’t queerbait” can always apply to A-list celebrities, especially when their public persona is completely built around a “brand” used to sell their art, while their private life is kept exclusively behind clsed doors and might be completely different, if not opposite, from what we see.
The issue imo is that a lot of the gp genuinely sees these celebrities as just “real people” and fail to aknowledge that there is little to nothing genuine about what they choose to show their audience. They have hundreds of people working behind the scenes to meticulously construct their image in order to sell their products to the masses, that’s quite literally a corporation.
The term queerbaiting is usually applied to fictional media, which is why “real people can’t queerbait”, but a mainstream celebrity with a higly curated image is much closer to a fictional character than an ordinary person. At best, they’re a mix of the two, a hybrid. So I think there should be at least a little nuance when discussing this topic in relation to major celebs. They are “real people” in private, when they’re off duty, but we’re not discussing their private lives here. We’re discussing their products/image and more often than not, whenever we get to see them, they only show us the version of themselves that is convenient for their business to sell, so maybe let’s be mindful of that. They shouldn’t be held to the same standards as random people with ordinary lives and no special social status; THOSE are the “real people” who, of course, can’t queerbait.
Consistently incorporating queer subtext and cultural/historical references that belong to our community into their own autobiographical art while not only never publicly acknowledging them as such (plausible deniability) but also keeping a very strict straight public image (forced closeting or not) is not ethical and I’m tired of pretending it is. Especially if they know they aren’t allowed to intervene when the fandom inevitably becomes so divided and toxic, because of course that’s what happens when you have such an ambiguous image in a rampantly homophobic and cis-heteronormative society: you cause division and harassment towards the most vulnerable groups in your audience that are just looking for representation as there is little to none in the media.
I want to frame this ask and give you a smack on the lips, anon! 💋 (if you consent to it of course!).
Consistently incorporating queer subtext and cultural/historical references that belong to our community into their own autobiographical art while not only never publicly acknowledging them as such (plausible deniability) but also keeping a very strict straight public image (forced closeting or not) is not ethical and I’m tired of pretending it is.
That's exactly the issue here. Thank you for putting it more succinctly and eloquenty than i ever could!
