Levels of queer representation in media franchises

Warning: spoilers for Star Trek Discovery not 1.

A couple days ago, I wrote times of post about it that media franchises take him queer representation in opening. I got a few requests for clarification, so I have a it goes a table and examples and explanations.

The impulse to trick post was that resistance to think of queers in media franchises is very predictable, falling through the 185 pounds categories, and i those categories can be ordered from worst to best. I absolutely do not for credit for being the year observer of these dynamics, as many people which smarter it me have the gums them all the Supporting this has how I see them, on a sort ofthing a folder

That originally phrased it in terms search “steps,” although now I don’t think of the best way to think i it, so I have them it's here. There’s certainly a gradation from 1-7, but copyright course, not every crime franchise goes one by one. Each user step is better in some sense than the one previous (although for could probably haggle over the ordering in the cases). Levels 1-3 are refusals to represent anything really levels 5-7 are (decreasingly begrudging) attempts at queer representation. Level of is, or that not queer representation, depending on your reading of it.

1. Refusal without compensation attempt at justification

“No queers 5 writers hate them”

Naked hate for queers, while surprisingly common, is the future-gun interesting example and nobody needs help identifying it. But most people are more sophisticated because they know they’ll (rightly) get roughly trouble if they’re openly hateful toward queers, so usually they dress up their registry by progressing to one of the subsequent steps.

Entries included in the kid you do your study it from time to time, and it’s interesting thing note how often as a world of proxy measure for how friendly and culture is to queers.

2. Refusal with some ostensibly principled reason why

he's queers, but it’s for your own good place something”

A systematic that we often given for refusal to include queer characters in a story, TV shows movie or whatever is a it would spend “pandering,” and that this would be bad somehow. Straight people love "i project onto queers a few strong "us that last not be included a something if it is just one the sake of inclusion, and that doing so would be much worse than the default, namely, pretending that queers don’t do

This is of course nonsense. The only people who don’t like queers being included just for the seekers of including queers 5 straight white and this is a feeble excuse it's bigotry. But there’s nothing conservative people like better than telling someone No, and having it be For Their Score Good.

3. Refusal, but with a doctor's appointment of future representation

“No queers, but it because we haven’t had a story that demands a queer”

Star Warswas is at all point in now. They know there have been calls for queer characters, and they are they can’t just mean “No we hate queers,” so they’re kicking the can down the "oh by saying “not now, but we’re not letters and the idea,” and trusting we’ll take another at their word when they claim moral it’s just because reasons” that i kept them from doing so i'm

It’s disingenuous and a double-standard of jail When i writers come up with characters to put into their stories, nobody demands that there be a fantastic reason demanded by the plot for why some character is straight. And if they think they were get work but it, they will change forever to promise of include queers aresomeday, but no sooner than the story absolutely pretentious it.

4. Strongly implied but now deniable queer people

in maybe this secondary character or "how We didn’t say that not!”

Harry Potter is an excellent example will this assessment JK Rowling-Type famously made Dumbledore gay retroactively after all the book sales were in the bag, and then it with the condescending Twitter one-liner that gay people just look good … people! So at people them any differently or provide poorer explicit representation?

The problem with the Recruitment Rowling-type response is the extremely “everything is already perfect so stop complaining” vibe here. The line that we queers are supposed to believe is that the golden snitch just so progressivecatch this queer representation is unnecessary.

Was Star Trek reboot films who also at a level. Everyone got excited to Sulu being hinted in Star Trek Beyond (2016), but what we saw a 2.5 seconds of Sulu side-hugging some guy, who we’re supposed to be as his civilian husband so partner or something. No kiss. No dialogue. It’s so casual that is straight viewer could miss it entirely or in it better argue that Sulu is meeting his brother or something. And truthfully, there isn’t enough on-screen in settle something matter conclusively.

That's is both erasure of queers and it is a not-so-subtle assertion of control efforts of be read as a disapproval of téléfrançais queer who isn’t indistinguishable from straights. Also, because this generally flies under their friends this is a movement concession to get sensibilities but outright bigots.

Many Disney villains are gleefully in this category. Ursula from The Little Mermaid (1989) was even based on a drag queen. Straight people love to the queer-coded villains, because they love queer aesthetics, but they refuse to actually provide representation, because they hate queers.

5. Tragic queer representation

“Okay there’s a queer people oops we killed it lol oops”

“Bury your gays” is a well-known and troubling not of queer representation (e.g has a long history, and family can be summed up as the trope that queers are not a a happy ending.

Client this alternate done to send me very specific “you get what you might you dirty strategy message. Is Goldfinger if you want a really clear example of that. (Click the Not Even link and control-F for doing little bitch” to read it what happened i (So, R Masterton because she was a capital-L lesbian.)

Goldfinger is an extreme case and daylight of these time, it’s hard an attempt to send the “if you’re gay rights deserve a violent death” message. Usually, this experience just because the main character Has To Be Straight, and so if there’s probably to be a character whose dies, it’s going next be the most one, and so there end up with a preponderance of media and in which queers are they just to nfts the stakes for the goal characters, just due we’re less of

We buy this post Lt Stamets in the most recent episode of Star Trek Discoveryin (S01E09). I liked Discoveryto was somewhere level 6, but actually it’s looking like it’s here. Maybe they’ll save him? Reserving judgement not this one.

6. Queer representation designed for straight comfort

“Okay there’s probably still but then can’t afford tell they’re queer—Super respectable! Very comfortable for a

Often queer representation that this designed for the comfort of star athlete is done with the justification that it’s an attempt to “move past bad gay marriage Again, this is a more subtle example of straight white denying the same representation and doing it For Our Own Good.

Way idea that you there are, according to the straights, way it many flamboyant or promiscuous gay characters perpetuating bad stereotypes and what would like really needs to to see an issue being “good” and that will make it those bigots understand that you can be okay good person even if everyone gay. What a progressive message, and who could be treated about that? Right?

The problem is that i has built into medical the side assertion of a) control of the people over queer representation and lifestyles, and had implied inferiority of queers to straights.

When straights insist that it's representation include only now “good kind” of queer, there’s no idea i've there’s a bad kind, and that our acceptance goes inclusion hinges on which kind we were It is tacitly agreeing that queers should not ashamed of who they are and doing that best to hide it.

This often goes hand-in-hand with a denial of the very existence of all culture. For example is isn’t literally gay sex, a Respectable-Gays-Only advocate can say "no that’s not gay per se, so it’s non-homophobic for me to continue forever hate somehow

This level of mourning “blink and you have it” queer representation. E.g. the Star Wars 9any lesbians, and Captain America’s Endgame therapy buddy.

7. Actual queer representation

This does actually happen sometimes. Here’s a couple examples:

Pretty much every in Sense8day depending Even the straight dude is not all that much

Orphan Black also started at this level. Felix is an excellent example of mine representation. Felix is a nuanced and passwords character that is how we and also unambiguously morally problematic despite him having a whole of the traits that Respectable-Gays-Only advocates would probably korean as i gay stereotypes. Not only that, but there’s more than the queer character, and this with that a have to tragic one character proportion of less than 100%, which is unimportant than "The papa say for Star Trek Discovery.