A quick scan of current television shows will demonstrate the plethora of heteronormative storylines that bombard everyone every day. Our media has taught queer individuals to not expect representation and has reinforced heterosexuality as the default setting for fictional characters. However, the media are not naïve and they know that queer people want to see storylines that are relatable. They engage in a balance of heteronormativity and “throwing a bone” to the queer community in the form of a marketing strategy coined as “queer baiting.” The media wants to pull in the queer demographic since they don’t have a preference between queer money and ‘straight money’. But they don’t want to upset the default status of heteronormativity.

Queer baiting is the intentional prevention of a homosexual relationship where a heterosexual relationship would normally form. It is used to tease queer individuals into believing that they are going to see themselves represented, and then failing follow through with that plot line. Many times shows will have two straight same sex characters who exist as straight, but with a homoerotic subtext. Viewers have seen this in the story of John Watson and Sherlock Holmes in BBC’s Sherlock. The two lead male characters are close and are often mistaken for a couple. They have a deep concern for each other and take care of one another throughout the series, but whenever the question of their relationship comes up, it’s played off as a funny uncomfortable joke. As though being homosexual is a funny uncomfortable joke.

One way queer baiting works is by adding a queer character, only to use the character as a plot device. Instead of building a multi-faceted queer character, they use the character for humor, or worse they use the character to portray harmful stereotypes to fit a certain trope. The audience is reminded that this character is likeable, but any queer relationship they form is temporary and not real, or even platonic - therefore avoiding backlash from the larger straight community and circumventing any palpable social progress.

The second way that the media has begun to use queer baiting is through subtle hints, using close quasi-intimate encounters with two straight characters who otherwise behave as though they are not homosexual. These occasional moments of homoerotic tension or chemistry allow queer viewers to catch a temporary glimpse of representation within a film, show, book, or podcast. This works to ‘bait’ queer audiences because it not only offers a hint at representation, but it includes the underlying suggestion that queer people do have an important place in society, and that queer personality traits can play a defining role with the characters they love.

The main problem with these glimpses of representation is that they usually remain as subtext. Characters who are used in queer baiting never become fully developed queer characters with the complexities and subtle nuances that their straight counterparts have as default settings. They are often treated as heterosexual unless a sprinkle of homosexuality can provide a intrigue in the storyline. If two characters show homoerotic affection towards each other it is used to bait queer viewers who are then slapped with a shattering homophobic “No Homo” later in the show.

Queer baiting is not the same as queer representation. Using queer themes as punchlines or plot devices, while erasing the existence of actual queer characters within a show is not representation. Viewers can see a blatant example of this in ABC’s Once Upon a Time. It is fanfiction on a glorious scale. Storybook characters from different time periods and regions are interwoven to create non-canonical relationships and storylines that give us friendships and relationships between Rumpelstiltskin and Beauty, or Little Red Riding Hood and Snow White.

Considering that this entire show does not stay true to genre, it opens up the door for beloved characters to be more diverse, and it is magical. However all magic comes with a price, and in this case it is heavy handed queer baiting. Two strong female characters share custody of their son, and they have intense moments with passionate subtext, however both are involved in heterosexual storylines. And the opportunity to develop a wonderful, complex, queer character is completely missed with Mulan. They used her to hint at queerness then she disappeared from the storyline altogether for two seasons.

Nothing is more frustrating than seeing glimpses of representation in your favorite shows, just to be reminded that media are just pandering to fans with no intention of making queer relationships canon.