After the class teaching presentations delivered last week, the subject of "queerbaiting" has come to mind a couple of times since. Before the term was presented in class I had never heard it used and quite frankly I'd love to analyze more examples of this phenomenon aside from "Rizzoli & Isles."
To be honest, my initial reaction to the dynamic between the two female leads in the series was positive. The fact that this series is one that intends to "keep you guessing" seems like it could have much more of an effect on viewers than to simply exploit the idea of a same-sex relationship. Yes, the sexual attention built between the two characters may be a ploy on behalf of the writers to reel in a homosexual viewership. At the same time, however - I feel like there is some positivity to be gleaned from the fact that it is never truly revealed on the series whether or not Rizzoli and Isles are actually engaged in a sexual relationship.
By pandering to curiosity and never making the idea an integral part to the show's storyline, I feel as if the writers behind "Rizzoli & Isles" could be introducing an element of acceptability to same-sex partnerships for viewers who would typically be opposed to a series with same-sex themes (i.e. "The L Word"). Granted, I have never viewed an episode of the series nor have I viewed any other episodes accused of "queerbaiting" in the past. However, if done tastefully, I feel as if the term "baiting" could be a bit strong to describe this plot-writing technique. Again, if approached respectfully this type of storyline could have the potential to create a more inclusive world for characters of all sexual orientations on television.
-Marisa Okano
I feel like I didn't get my point across very well! By nature, "queer bait" tends to have a negative connotation. This quote from the article I posted on the blog earlier sums it up pretty well-
ReplyDelete"Indeed, the idea behind 'no homo' is both that homosexuality is little more than a gag, and also that it's deviant and wrong some way – "of course we're not gay, how could you even think that" is the underlying assumption behind the joke."
The creators responsible for Rizzoli & Isles have gone on record several times to say that the characters are not gay, which to me is just as good as stating explicitly in the show that they are not in a sexual relationship (or really, a romantic relationship of any kind). Something I didn't get around to mentioning in my presentation was the types of responses you are likely to see on the show's official facebook page - basically, people who are threatening to boycott Rizzoli & Isles if it becomes "another gay show."
Again from the article -
"When it's [queerbaiting] that deliberate as in the cases of Sherlock or Rizzoli & Isles, there is a distinct feeling that the creators are playing with LGBTQ – and invested-in-LGBTQ-relationships (since the core of the "Johnlock" fanbase is slash-fanfiction-writing straight women) – dollars, but don't care enough about us that they'd risk actually offending homophobes with explicit queer representation. Actors or writers may insist it's not homophobic, but there is a distinct feeling that we're being taken advantage of, that we're second-class fans who they don't care if they do a disservice to so as long as we still watch."
If you're interested in other shows where this issue has cropped up, I'd suggest looking into Sherlock, Supernatural, Teen Wolf, and/or Xena. Lots of interesting things to dissect there.