and just yesterday Kit Conner was forced to come out because hounds of people accused him of “queerbaiting” by playing a bi dude in a show literally about people discovering their identity over time, highlighting the fact that no one owes anyone an explanation for their sexuality. how did these people miss the message of the show that badly?

Another point that often gets overlooked is that queer-coded expression isn't an appropriation of something that doesn't belong to you, or a mockery like blackface. It can, instead, be the first, tentative step into a world you're not yet sure you want to be a part of. By jumping down the throat of anyone who's presumed straight but is trying out some Gay Things, we ignore the fact that coming into one's queerness is a process, one that should be encouraged whether or not it's an early sign of something more. Why are we gatekeeping? What is gained from that? Presumably our goal should instead be creating a world in which queer expression is so plentiful, diverse, and ever-changing that the capitalist incentive to bait no longer exists.

I've adored watching the evolution of this channel. The journey from "do professor x and magneto wanna fuck?" To "sexuality and queerness should not be enforced and doing so enforces the capitalist patriarchal status quo"

I noticed Dan and Phil are on the board behind you. I would love a video on them. They're kind of fascinating. Their fandom aggressively shipped them to the point that they dug into their online past to compile evidence of them being queer and in a secret relationship. When they denied both of these things, it just made people even more obsessive and invasive. So they switched to not saying anything about their relationship status or sexualities, while still being playful about both in their videos. Then people started to accuse them of queerbaiting. Now, after they've both come out of the closet, there are STILL some people who accuse two gay men of queerbaiting for refusing to disclose the nature of their relationship. Because they make tongue-in-cheek remarks about it in their videos sometimes and use it for clickbait titles. Talk about a perfect example of people feeling entitled to a celebrity's personal life.

I'm watching this video shortly after Kit Connor's tweet blowing up, which to me is one of the most heinous examples of the effects of internet "identity regulation." The misuse and abuse of the term "queerbaiting" is a bane of the internet.

I am not joking. I am sending this to my screenwriting professor. This is a super useful analysis of queerness in media

i just cannot believe as a society we went from hyperanalyzing harry's relationship with louis wanting to out them two, conspiracy about louis' child being fake... to actually saying harry is too straight to act flamboyant

I didn't watch the video but I feel like I can trust him. He wears glasses

I think the act of putting queer subtext isn't a bad thing. It is the gaslighting after the fact that is so insidious. They use a film language that is intricately tied to queer identity and history, but when we as a community say 'thats queer' ppl will reply with 'stop over analyzing' and 'cant (gender) just have platonic friendships'. The rest of society treats us like we are just making things up. Just another step in cutting us out of history. They cut us out of film history this time. Then when we go to the creators to confirm what we are seeing is real we get anything from leading coy answers to outright heteronormativity and homophobia. And I think what is happening with celebrities is somewhat tied to the trauma we have about this. A left over nihilism that says relying on subtext will only lead to that same feeling of mounting disappointments and powerlessness. And that really sucks bc it isn't good for anyone.

Something I hate the most about when real people get accused of queerbating is how it often reaffirms outdated, constrictive ideas about gender expression. People seem to think that if a man dresses in a feminine way then he must be queer, and if he isn't then he's queerbaiting. Same for women, if a woman dresses in a masculine way she must be queer and if she isn't then she's queerbaiting. Its a super backward way of thinking, clothing has no gender and people should be able to express themselves in any way they like regardless of gender or sexuality. I get that dressing in a gender non-conforming way is a historically queer form of expression, but I don't think we should be gatekeeping this either. If cis and straight people want to dress in a non-conforming way, in my opinion that can only be a positive thing as it just further breaks down cultural barriers and expectations about gender. I feel like our culture has become more squeamish and less accepting of this in recent decades. Back in the 60s and 70s, straight male rockstars like Jimi Hendrix and Mick Jagger and Robert Plant all dressed in a very flamboyant and feminine way. And of course there were bi icons like David Bowie. The way Harry Styles dresses is nothing new for a male rockstar, and I don't think his sexuality is even a tiny bit relevant. I want to live in a world where the link between clothing and gender and sexuality has been completely torn down and people are free to wear whatever the heck they like

I've been thinking about queerbaiting a lot in the past few days, especially when it comes to real people and being 'out'. Queerbaiting should not be applied to real people, because you shouldn't have to declare how you identify in order to avoid being harassed for expressing 'queerness'. If you want sexual/gender liberation you can't get mad at Harry Styles for wearing a dress without saying he's queer first, or get mad at Cardi+Normani for posing nude for their single.

I think my biggest issue with Harry’s weirdly removed assessment of mlm queer media was also just this obnoxiously puritanical notion that sex must be either tender and sensitive OR “rough,” “hardcore” “animalistic.” For me the subtext is not only is it impossible for sex to be both soft and hardcore, but softer sex is *real* sex. When we look at the overlap between the queer community and the kink community, we can recognize that sex need not be slow paced and “soft” to be loving, caring, intimate sex. One doesn’t negate the other. And if seeing men “go at it” with one another only bothers him in the mlm context (it didn’t bother him in Don’t Worry Darling or other het portrayals??) Even if Harry is queer himself, I think he’s likely surrounding himself with heteronormative, vanilla people who make HIM feel the most profound and noncomforming in the room. In many spaces a guy like Harry is the least radically noncomforming male identifying person. It’s all relative, of course. But I think it would do him well to make distinctions between his perceptions of a community based on his incredibly specific and removed subject position as a “straight passing” celebrity and the general norms, dynamics, and practices of the community that he may or may not partake in or be exposed to. It’s no less real or valid just because he isn’t aware of what exists in, by and for the queer community!

Can we just take a moment to appreciate whatever is going on on his wall.

I think what's missing on the Harry Styles (and about others) analysis is how much the discourse relies on text book biphobia. Ok, it's his position that we should move away from rigid labels and that he does not feel the need to clarify anything (which btw is his position on anything personal), which, regardless of whether u agree or not, is his right. Straight ppl don't need to clarify they're straight before making straight art. So, like u said, he has a song where explicitly says he's been with guys and girls (and points at himself while singing it) plus two music videos where he's with men and women (and ppl of other genders). So it's very interesting that he is accused of faking queerness, that he is asked to prove himself by detailing his dating history. I do NOT believe he would stop being criticised if he came out as bi/pan, bc the only thing twitter is doing is replicating biphobic discourse, regardless of his personal identity label.

‘An Overanalysis’ is exactly why we flock here. Thank you for your new video essay which gives us life. I’ve been waiting for this since I saw a sneak peek of it on Twitter.

Being a big fan of 80's hard rock/heavy metal, the thought on my mind whenever I see these accusations against guys like Harry Styles is: Are they really queerbaiting, or are they just peacocking?

Not gonna lie. I've always found myself in "gay" dominated parts of the internet, vr-chat, certain sub-reddits, this KZfaq channel. I wear dresses on occasion and my favourite colour to wear is pink, I love to bake, I have a teaching role. What I'm saying is I'm a stereotypical straight guy that acts like a gay guy. I fully get Harry's stance here, I'd prefer if all blokes we're more open to feminine traits and activities instead of having to split the line between super gay, and super straight.

love that feeling when a video essay squishes your brain around into a new shape

Being a former tumblr-ite at the height of Supernatural fandom - this is the “overanalysis” I’ve been waiting for my entire life. Thank you!!

Ooooh, THIS. You actually put into words some of the things that have been bothering me since 2019 and the "is Good Omens queerbait" discourse (which to this day is enough to drive me into a fury). There is just NO WAY that we can have one specific thing to signify Good Representation™. You want a kiss? I've seen a kiss used for bait before. You want something sad out loud? I could give you multiple things with one-liners stating queerness that are really frikking straight the rest of the time. And then don't get me even started on the "kiss or it doesn't count" crowd equating queerness to romance/sexuality. Screwing over, among others, trans people, aromantic people, asexual people, and queer people with any other kind of relationships. Like, you know. Friends and older queers mentoring younger ones. Anyway, what I like to look at is how much queerness was used during promotions for the movie/show, and how normal the creators act about it. Your video was really helpful by giving me other questions to ask. The feelings of alienation is a good one. And yeah, real people are NEVER queerbait. Also, let guys wear skirts in general, jeez. They are comfy and they look good, and it is genuinely not fair that we haven't reached the point yet where anyone can wear them.

I'm only fifteen minutes in, but in my opinion, the problem with the use of queer subtext in media today has a lot to do with the fact that the restrictions that originated the practice are no longer in place. I think that's why people expect an explicit delivery of that promise. Personally, I rarely see queer subtext used sincerely today. And I love subtext. Sometimes I even prefer it to explicitness. However, in cases like bbc merlin, bbc sherlock, supernatural, house md, and many others, I can't help but feel that I'm being used by people who have no real interest in paying homage to that wonderful practice that is the art of queer subtext, and only want to tell a story that draws me in without compromising the loyalty of the heterocis audience. With regards to applying these same expectations to real life people, though... I don't understand it. We have no right to demand people share anything with us. Famous people seem to lose their humanity for their audience the moment they hit the spotlight. They cease to be people and become commodities, objects to be owned and where all sorts of expectations are placed, with no thoughts spared for the person of flesh and blood buried under the weight of fame. Younger queer people who feel entitled to this information from their favourite celebs would do well to remember what people like Dirk Bogarde and Rock Hudson were put through back in the day. And if that's too far back, then they could think about men like Lee Pace or Daniel Howell, whose lives in the closet were defined by the horde of people that demanded explanations and revelations they never had any right to ask for. I understand that displays like Harry Styles' might feel tacky and insincere. Hell, I can't say I give a damn about the man myself. But even if that WAS the case, even if Styles was using his "ambiguity" to make a pass at the queer community and profit off of them, that is not his problem. It's us as consumers who choose what we do with our wallets. If you insist on giving your money to ambiguous famous guys because you THINK they might be queer instead of -at the very least- famous OPENLY queer people, then that's your problem and yours alone. Personally, I think that money would be better spent within ourselves and our communities instead of anyone famous at all, but that's just me.

Holy shit… I think my friend transcended queer. For a little backstory, this friend was dating someone who identified as a girl, then realised they were some flavour of Non Binary. This friend realised that they didn’t really like this person because of their gender; they just liked THEM. Naturally some people (including myself lol) asked him what this meant in terms of his sexuality, but in a conversation between us, we voiced it; he’s just him. He isn’t really straight, isn’t really bi, he’s not even super queer by some definitions. He’s just him. And that’s kind of how I want to live my life. Labels are helpful and swaggy and awesome, but with labels, there always comes a risk of “policing” how one uses those labels. This has always been something I resented about the community. It’s taken me a while to realise that I can just be me. I don’t have to find the specific label that feels right. I’m just queer.

Really sad that only two days after this is posted, Kit Connor was forced to out himself after ‘queer baiting’ accusations. Poor guy.

I'd love to see more alternative commentary on how real-life people can be hurt by the notion of queerbaiting, with Kit Connor from Heartstopper being forced to come out recently because people were accusing him of being straight and stealing a queer role. Same thing with Becky Albertali, who was being accused of fetishization and wrote a really heartbreaking letter about how she'd been forced to come out.

As a queer (pan but in an open m/m relationship) theatre artist, I’ve always had trouble with this when it comes to casting. It’s always bothered me when people try to gate-keep who should play what roles. We say that coming out isn’t anyone else’s business. And we all admit that sometimes people can claim to be straight when they’re not. I know a trans actor who built their whole musical theatre career as the gender they were assigned at birth. They don’t want to transition until they retire because they don’t want to have to re-build their whole career or learn how to sing again with a new voice. Maybe a role is the way a person is able to explore a hidden side of themselves or is a stop on the journey to coming out or could be the only way they feel they can truly be themselves- we don’t know. While I understand about authentic representation and that there are often limited roles for queer people, I don’t think it’s a simple answer. And it gets even more complicated when the actors are teenagers or even younger (a good problem to have as we get more queer media with younger characters or aimed at younger demographics)- we expect them to totally know who they are and to be out? I think we need to have more grace and leeway for people- while pushing for more authentic representation and roles for queer actors.

"it's gayer to fail the gay test than to pass any stinky test" I am jumping up and down I am cheering I am tattooing these words to my face I am turning them into a chant my new cult has to recite

The exchange section lost me on the assumption that the exchanges aim is explicit declaration/representation. For many its just a matter of 'if you're gonna put rather obvious subtext in you better own it and not put people down when they recognize it or mock them for hoping to see confirmation." I think Hannibal is a great example. A majority of the fandom wouldnt think to accuse it of queerbaiting because of the handling of the creators and cast in regards to what they did and how they treated fans shipping Hannibal/Will. They dont shame, they dont dismiss, and the never insist on "taking it back" in canon by making a point of having it made clear its all hetcis here you silly people. Then there is Sherlock where the creators have openly laughed and treated it as an oddity that even before the BBC show there were people who read there relationship as queer. What they put in the show was obviously meant to titilate shippers while behind the scenes they openly dismisses and scoffed. Hannibal used queer subtext to give characters richness and tell what is fundamentally a queer story even if their isnt explicit rep shown by the main characters. A very different thing to Sherlock, Teenwolf, Supernatural, and others with documented cases of creators judging while using shipping or reading of characters as queer to keep that section of the audience engaged but only in ways they can and likely will definately take back or never acknowledge as genuine.

seeing this in my recommended right after the kit connor situation 😔

I liked how you mentioned you can criticize the way Harry Styles acts without theorizing or digging into his identity. That feels like something both "sides" to this argument were missing

it's heart breaking to see what happened with kit connor today because of these same archaic notions on queerness, and expectations from celebrities. 💔💔💔

is Shawn Mendes actually queerbaiting? He seems more like a target of hypocritical queer heteronormative """humour""

Just gonna throw this out there: if Harry was somewhat attracted to men, but also mostly dating women - and would openly say so, he would likely be criticised for that as well. Bis who are leaning hetero romantic (as I am and suspect him to be) usually end up being either called ‚closeted‘ or ‚fake‘. I‘m not sure how one wins that situation? We gotta be either straight or gay or if we are bi, we need to be exactly in the middle and date gay, cause otherwise we’re not ‚real‘. Maybe the solution would be to just accept that we’re all human and don‘t fit into neat little drawers at all? Instead we inhabit a variety of spectrums, making up a kaleidoscope of our individual personality.

I firmly believe that real people can’t queerbait, or at the very least people can’t blindly accuse real people of queerbaiting. This is simply because, unlike fictional characters, real people can change and develop different interpretations and understandings of their own sexualities with time. Is a person queerbaiting, or trying to explore their own sexuality? Even if someone is outwardly straight or claims to not be queer, that isn’t something set in stone. And even then, there’s a chance that they’re closeted and maintain being straight because of the potential backlash coming out could cause them. Like the whole Dan and Phil fiasco. Basically, I think “queerbaiting” as a concept can only be applied to fictional situations and characters, and NOT real people or scenarios.

I'm only 20 minutes in so maybe this concern is addressed later, but I find the comparison of explicit and implicit representation incomplete. Yes, a part of the reason queer people want representation is the internal thrill of seeing one's self reflected in media which is provided by the implicit, but a bigger part is wanting the associated societal effects. When _everyone_ sees something portrayed in mass media as a normal and acceptable part of culture, it becomes normalized and influences wider public perception. But if only people within a specific subgroup who are fluent in the language of the subtext can see it, that effect is completely lost. In other words, many non-queer people aren't even going to see the implicit queer representation and therefore won't be influenced by it. Back when the explicit, confirmed representation was banned, there was a feeling of solidarity with the writers who we assumed were doing as much as they could and signaling to us that they're either queer themselves or accepting of the queer community. But now that signalling doesn't exist because they're _not_ doing as much as they can so the subtext takes on a completely different meaning. In other words, in the history of implicit "representation", it isn't actual queer representation but rather a sign of solidarity which signals a desire to provide actual representation. When nothing is preventing the actual representation (beyond potential loss of other audiences), it's just a false signal sent to make money.

I came out recently, at 40, I didn't struggle with internal homophobia, I grew up with homosexuality as nothing more than a biological dimension, but I knew socially I wanted to be sure, because like an internet comment, or peeing n a pool, its hard to reverse, and my catholic family are accepting but not good at nuance.

Kit Connor, one of the stars from Heartstopper, has been forced to out himself which he did a few hours ago. A section of the fandom repeatedly harassed him and his co-stars on Twitter and other platforms up until a point where apparently, Connor had to step forward in order to prevent his career from taking a heavy hit as well as protecting the Heartstopper Cast&Crew. Prior, said section from the fandom accused Connor of "queerbaiting" which led to him coming out even though he didn't actually want to. This is a new perspective on the subject. Please consider it.

Alex your videos are seriously so well done!!! So clever and thorough!

well this quickly aged well with Kit Conner being bullied into coming out. Shame on anyone who participated in that

5:15 This whole part describes way too many Japanese cartoons. They'll go as far as having girls go on dates, make out, & have sex with each other only to later have one of them randomly get together with the male main character & not even acknowledge the cheating aspect even though the other girl is *right there* & they're talking about the main character. But of course it "doesn't count" as cheating because the girls never actually said "girlfriend" or "partner" or "I love you". They just did & said everything else that could imply it & were consistently monogamous & neither of them had done any of it with anyone before or ever shown attraction to a guy. Also, the reason I say "girls" is because they're usually 14-16.

A case that always comes to my mind when talking about people being forced to out themselves is definitely David Bowie coming out as gay caused by pressure from the public and ended up expressing a deep regret later on, especially after being criticised AGAIN for then being kn relationships with women after that forced label didn’t quite fit him, as he happened to prefer to be unlabelled. Ofc we need to consider that even the label “bisexual” wasn’t label enought and he was forced to make a choice between “liking men” and “liking women”, but I do believe that there are a lot of parallels to the cases we currently whiteness being discussed all over the media

Identity regulation.... That's it! it sucks I see that becoming so common from a community where I and many others expected openness and acceptance regardless of the details of our private lives. I know how it feels to look forward to and search representation every where on media and irl, but it gets to a point where it stops being fun and becomes obsessive and suffocating.

YESS the content i subscribed for. i've wanted to have this conversation about harry for SO LONG!!! i can't watch this vid now cos im going into a class but I CANT WAIT TO WATCH THIS LATER alex, gracias!!!!!!!!

I think your criticism of the exchange theory of queerness being a paradox only works if we imagine the creators of the shows that queerbait would honestly have a dialog with their audiences claiming that subtextual queer representation is still representation. What we historically got instead was vehement denials that there was anything queer about it in the first place. For the creators there was no promise, textual or subtextual, of queer representation. I get the impression that the creators of the shows had sublimated the language of coded queer cinema and romantic tropes to such a degree that it just seemed natural to portray John and Sherlock staring longingly at one another on screen or use the sexy lady pan-up and nervous man reaction shot for Castiel and Dean. They knew they were riffing on coded gay and romantic tropes, but they never saw doing so as meaningfully transgressive or promissory. Now, a decade after the original Tumblr queerbaiting criticisms, more creators are actually understanding the meaning of these tropes to queer audience members and do understand them in terms of a promise for representation. See Our Flag Means Death and Sandman. So we got there eventually.

Kinda frustrating that we want more flexibility when it comes to gender norms then criticize people for not conforming to gender norms. Even if Harry Styles was actually straight I fail to see how him wearing a dress does any harm whatsoever. No one accuses straight women of queer baiting for wearing pants, and that's something that used to be considered super queer up until a few decades ago. Now it's just normal. Men wearing skirts is easy more common throughout history but that's queer baiting somehow.

I just don’t think I can ever forgive Derida for stealing Foucault’s hair and grafting it to his own head smh

I mean, yeah, I kind of do want 'Twilight but gay'...

i always watch one of ur videos before writing a sociology or philosophy essay it gets me in my argumentative mode,,, great video as always!!!

I keep thinking about all "queerbaiting is for queer folks to read in, straight guys couldn't catch it". Truth is - I'm queer, and whenever me and my straight friends and family stumbling on queerbait, everyone in the room actually can recognize it. It is often surprisingly subtle, and when I'm pointing that out, most of the times they are agreeing with me. All of the slightest things like touches and look read by them easily, even when they don't recognize the reference.

Im only 30 minutes into this video so far, but I just want to write a huge thank you! Your helping me build a better understanding around my relationship to media that is uncommunicative of explicit queer text/subtext but yet feels as if it holds something beyond the hetronormative constraints of many mainstream medias products. Much of the more nuanced+quasi academic language that you use is going over my head, LOL, but I am happy to say I am taking at least a small part of what your saying and hopefully digesting it in a way that will leave me able to better navigate the media I consume!! Again thanks for your content, cant belive you publish this for free! Will definitely be subscribing to your Patreon as soon as possible! Are they gay? Who knows!

something i really resonate with is you mentioning how queer ppl often want to enforce heterosexuality by being so rigid with queerness. this is something i’ve been noticing more and more as i settle into my own identity, and it makes me wonder if i’m thinking too hard sometimes. so i appreciate that point being brought up multiple times and discussed in depth

Thank you for all of your hard work, Alex. Your videos are so careful and loving and reflective and so obviously well researched.

i like your funny words, magic man.

I really like this argument! I’ve long been nervous when the internet tries policing what people do unless they outright say they’re gay. It’s almost like they’re trying to forcibly out people. Always gave me a bad feeling.

I can't describe in words how much i enjoy your new content! Thank you for your hard work 🤝

youre my favorite youtuber actually you put my opinions into words with sociological terms im obsessed

This was insanely good and really accessible. Thanks for making this video!

Good job putting nuance and interesting theory in what is, indeed, very annoying online discourse. And thanks for breaking down Judith Butler's writing, it's not the easiest to get into !

you and your content/contents skills have really evolved and grown with your audience. I remember watching the merlin bbc edition of “are they gay?” what seems like a very long time ago (I couldn’t even touch the foot pedals five years ago. now I can legally drive a car??). now I’m watching this very well researched video essay from you. it goes further in depth and really showcases the work and effort you put into these videos. (also, I like that you still keep humor and references in your videos.)

this is an amazing anaylisis and dissection of a topic that ends up branching out into so many different directions. it's like super impressive that you were able to tackle so much of it and keep it all wrapped together. i honestly think this will be a video i send to people because the evolution of "what is queerbaiting?" to "what does it mean to be visably/tangibly queer?" (what whatever sense that question even means) is an important one to ask ourselves whether we subscribe to strict labels or not. fantastic video.

I’m only ten minutes into the video, and I’ve already laughed out loud multiple times! Your sense of humor in combination with genuine informational queer content is always a delight!

TBH I don’t agree with every conclusion you drew (yet, I might change my mind) but I feel shaken to my core by this entire piece. I am rethinking some things in very unique ways. Im a big fan. You’ve got the power to stimulate the noggin in the media critic space that I crave.

I’m gonna source this video for part of a presentation I have in a sociology class! Thank you for being such a great educator and theorist, you put these concepts into much more digestible terms and it’s so important.

This is one of the best video essays I've every seen! So many great points!

This video was really insightful and managed to articulate the criticism I already had about real people being "queerbaiting". I also found the criticism of identity politics very insightful and also relevant to my own current trouble with labels. It really comes down to criticising the actions of a person, not the person itself or their identity.

Wow. As much as i enjoyed your are they gay videos, i am so glad you're pursuing video essays. This is pure gold

thank you SO MUCH for this essay it's freaking brilliant and frankly so is the comment section (so far of what im seeing anyway). really great and substantial discussions going on here that i genuinely wish is what we could see more of on social media at large

On the topic of gay media that just perpetuates cis-het tropes/structures, I can’t help but think of (and I’m so sorry to bring this up in your Good Christian Comments Section) the abundant use of “omegaverse” in media depicting gay relationships. The whole thing kind of originated in the realm of slash fanfic writing, but now it seems to be expanding into more commercial areas, and I’m sure there are already people who have made a lot of money off of media featuring it. I just think the trope is so ironic, if that’s the correct word, as it is mainly utilized to depict gay relationships in the most heterosexual way possible. Like we invented a separate universe for fiction where there isn’t homophobia, but there are still all the deep-rooted prejudices and controlling systems that come along with it, just ascribed to a new set of identities. And for sure, such a thing can be interesting to explore, but only if you’re actually inspecting and subverting the whole thing. But the majority of omegaverse narratives I’ve seen do nothing to challenge any of it. In fan fiction, it was just an innovative excuse for the characters to fuck, which I’m certainly not opposed to, but I think sex pollen is a perfectly fine trope that can serve the same purpose without making it so weirdly cisnormative. My unemployed ass could write fifteen essays on this but I’ll stop here.

Now, Kit Connor had forced to out himself because of accusations of queer baiting, this video you are making is VERY important right now!

This was definitely the hardest I've had to think in a long time. I really appreciated how challenging this was.

Commenting for the algorithm gods. This was an amazing watch. Your videos keep getting better and better!

Man I'm loving these essays. Keep it up Alex!

insanely brilliant and an astute break-down of identity politics uses and limitation and a stern reminder queerness is a social construct. thank you!

Lestat said it right when he said he was "undefined" in the new Interview With The Vampire show. I have always felt that way. Why box myself into something that makes other people feel more comfortable. Who I'm attracted to is no one's business besides mine. Sure it helps people find out who is safer to be around and gives something to bond over, but limiting people just b/c of who they might want to sleep with or date is baffling. It took me so long to realize these things about myself b/c a solid definition was hard b/c of how society views this stuff. I do get disappointed in media that hints at something and nothing happens, sure but outright displays aren't always necessary. We don't need to see someone confirm it physically or verbally sometimes.

your videos (essays) are always so well written i love the comedic aspect.. and of course the knowledge you bestow upon us 🥸

I just wanna say how glad I am that you decided to spent your wit and precious time on making hourlong videos on the tube and that the algorithm has led me to them!

yes! finally a video essay on this. when those tweets blew up about harry styles I was so confused

What a timing. Haven't watched the video yet, but in the light of Kit Connor being forced to come out because of accusations of queerbaiting literally yesterday this is an incredibly timely conversation.

i love this video so far (20 minutes in) but had to pause and comment because im losing it at the "trust me im wearing a shirt" joke, that was so well done. ur script writing for these videos is so high quality

i watch your videos before I write essays because it makes me feel smart. i like the way you format you work and lead into new topics seamlessly. i use it as inspiration to actually write well and put effort into school. great video!

coincidentally, I'm writing an article for my school magazine about queerbaiting!! I will be definetely borrowing some info from this video😈

Another excellent video! Thank you for articulating and explaining these issues so clearly. You really help me understand ideas that I have but can't quite put into words :-)

This is definitely the vibe and has been for a minute. Great stuff

love the new style of content !

I think all of this sounds like a really nice pipe dream- to be able to define ourselves without relation to straightness. But I feel like it doesnt hold up in a society that revolves around straightness. Maybe in 40 more years

I love the visuals and the little gags and of course the nuanced and very informative analysis

Quarter of a way through this I had to upvote and leave a comment. Phenomenal video, very interesting and thought-provoking as well as entertaining and enjoyable.

loving your style and the tender bisexual lighting. You´ve done it again Alex!

that was a big and very very interesting video with a lots of different ways if thinking this problematic. I'm sure i'll have to watch it again bc it' that kind of question when you want to find a opinion but the more you think about the more complex it become. And rethinking queerness is the kind of discourse that maybe we need more and more since capitalism have rebrand it with family-friendly and heterosexual code or code that reject other community like ace ou poly. But in summary, very good, love your channel as always ^^ (my english is bad sorry)

This was incredible. I would love to get my hands on the bibliography!

I love the direction your channel is going in, Alex. Super interesting stuff.

I love the bisexual lighting you're using. Gay subtext

That legitimately blew my mind. thank you amateur internet sociologist.

you are just fantastic, brilliant video once again!

wow alex i need you to know how influential your videos have been on my world view!! i went from being a sad queerbaited teen trying to figure out why i connected to merlin on an uncomfortably personal level, to being able to analyse and criticise the complexity of queer representation in media, and even just queer culture in general. you have ignited a curiosity for sociology in me and i can’t wait to see more of your stuff in the future!!

I think that any type of policing of individuals (yes famous ppl are individuals too) can be dangerous. Ofc there's levels to it and what not, but as a queer myself I would rather use my energy to call out big companies for pink washing and queer baiting. A lot of companies go "yay pride month hey gays" at the same time as not treating their lgbtq+ employees well, donating to anti gay organisations etc. To me, that is a far more important activism to tend to than getting on someone's case for wearing "too gay clothes". But that could just be me 🤷‍♂

This video is actually super important in light of what happened with kit connor

God your videos are insanely good, i can't even pick a favorite part

my favorite thing about harry styles discourse is that every youtube who makes a video about him reads his quotes in the most heinous british accent, it’s a great touch!

as a queer sociology major these videos always make me so happy, I love the sociological perspectives you bring to queerness

I think we want explicit queerness because we want the stories to explore queer experiences and love, not just say "these two are implicitly queer" and treat that like it's representation. We want love stories, and passion, and feelings- not just the implicit knowledge that maybe that is going on behind the scenes. We deserve narratives that in some way touch upon what it is to be gay, and to be lesbian, and to be bi, and to be trans, and all the other stripes of the infinite rainbow. Or at least, that's my two cents. Oh and also, its really annoying when the implicitly queer couple gets paired off with straight lovers and makes it clear that they never loved each other because the producers wanted to quash the subtext. All your implicit-but-nonetheless-valid representation can be crushed like a delicate flower. And, I want the queer narratives in stories to exist for everyone, not just the people on the lookout for them. I want straight people to see a story about gay or lesbian romance, not just have it encoded in a way that only we can parse. That's all the change in my pocket. Guess I had more to say than I thought.