jacklesandmoose:

theangelgabrieldidmyhair:

What if there was one of those Snickers commercials and it’s Sam and Dean except Sam is actually Lucifer and he’s torturing and just generally being awful and Dean goes, “Sammy, have a Snickers. You turn into the devil when you get too hungry.” And then the tagline flashes, “You’re not you when you’re hungry.”

I AM CRYING OF LAUGHTER

Some further thoughts on - what beautiful monsters, oh: An Explanation of Queer-Baiting and Why it's a Problem

drsilverfish:

feministcrixus:

zemmer:

In this context, I am using the word “queer” as an umbrella term for gay, bisexual, pansexual, trans*, and gender-variant people. I recognize that it is not ideal, and I am sorry for that.

For those of you who don’t understand the concept of queer-baiting,…

DrSilverfish adds: In this interesting discussion I would caution against, however, making TPTB into a monolithic entity out to “bait” queer audiences. The truth is that there is the Network, the Channel, the Advertisers/ Sponsors, the Producers, the Writers, the Actors and last but definitely not least, the Editors, involved in the production of narrative television drama.

Some of those folks might be LGBTQ or LGBTQ-allies and write or interpret or edit queer moments or suggestions into scenes along the way, even where that wasn’t the overall “master-plan”. Historically, this is how many instances of queer representation made their way into filmic subtext. If any of you who might be interested haven’t seen the excellent documentary ”The Celluloid Closet” based on Vito Russo’s equally excellent book, then I thoroughly recommend it.

In particular Gore Vidal, as script-writer on the Hollywood blockbuster Ben Hur (1959) talks about how he attempted to infuse a gay subtext (that the hero Judah Ben-Hur and his friend Massala had previously been lovers) into the text, with, according to Vidal, the active collaboration of Stephen Boyd who played Messala but unbeknownst to Charlton Heston, who played Ben Hur.

Often the only way queer subtext (not textual allusion there to be laughed at) appeared in filmic representation historically was thanks to queer Hollywood.

So, we do not know the behind-the-scenes politics regarding Supernatural and Dean’s sexuality. It is, in my view, too simplistic to refer to an entity “the show” as “queer-baiting”. I will, for instance, eat my hat (although I know this is just speculation) if Edlund is not squeeing as hard as any Destiel fan at the beautiful hero-as-bisexual “coming out” story he potentially has on his hands, other parts of the machinery being willing.

So yeah, I’m not one (yes, I identify as queer, in case that needs saying) who would rather have no queer subtext regarding Dean in SPN unless all-out definitive canon is on its way. Representation sometimes happens incrementally, and each step paves the way for the next one.

Regarding Queer Baiting: What it Is and What It is Not

crowleyshouseplant:

it has come to my attention that some people are unclear what “queer baiting” means in a tv show

so let me try to set it down for you

a note before we continue: i focus mainly on being gay, however, I want to note that many times “gay” and “queer” are conflated as being one and the same, which is not how it works. Though “gay” is a kind of queer, it is not the only kind of queer. I would also go so far as to argue that when we refer to “queer baiting” we are usually referring to a very specific kind of “queer baiting,” ie, “gay baiting” because many other queer people, eg, people who are trans, are literally erased from most mainstream narratives because of their very obvious non-presence in them—it is hard to “bait” when their existence is not even acknowledged.

This erasure, this non-presence, is A Very Serious Problem, but for now, I want to focus mainly on queer baiting that usually occurs in a gay context.

that said, let us carry on:

Read More