Queer representation within the media is often looked at as progress, yet most of it is frustratingly incomplete. LGBTQ+ media in general has come so far, but there is still so far to go.
Often in the media, creators will tease a stereotypical queer relationship that is written with just enough ambiguity to spark hope or demonstrate a queer identity. However, they have no intention of actually letting a queer character exist on screen. Media industries will often attract queer audiences with this tactic, while also avoiding the risks of actually including a community. This is also known as queerbaiting, a marketing tactic in media where creators will hint to the possibility of queer representation to attract LGBTQ+ audiences.
This happens in movies, TV shows, literature and music. According to The Drum, only 38% of consumers who seek LGBTQ+ content are satisfied with the representation.
Some may argue that there’s too much representation; however, it is important to differentiate presence from representation.
According to the Gallup Poll, 9.3% of U.S. adults identified as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or something other than heterosexual in 2024.
Another article by Mathew Phares’ Civic Issue Blog about the history of queer representation in media shows it was not until the 1970s that some positive representation began. However, it was minimal, usually lacking complexity, development and only appearing in a few episodes.
In these episodes, the queerness of the characters was depicted as a conflict, or an issue among the characters, often disrupting the lives of the heterosexual characters.
In the 1990s a show called “Ellen,” came out, being the first show to have an openly gay character as the main character; this showed true progress within the community. This came with other recurring roles like for queer characters such as “Will and Grace,” and, “Buffy the Vampire Slayer,” these changed representation for the better.
This trend would continue into the 2000s with the show “Where Are We On TV,” by LGBTQ+ advocacy organization GLAAD. There is value in visibility.
LGBTQ+ representation has come a long way and still is not at its full complexity. The importance of this representation, according to an article about the “Harmful Effects of Queerbaiting,” a TV show that came out in the 1990s “Xena: Warrior Princess,” Xena and her best friend were actively becoming a couple, as the TV show implied. Many who watched it and were queerbaiting felt invalidated.
Along with that, queerbaiting takes a toll on mental health. On-screen relationships mean something, they could pose as models for validation, and to relate too. Getting baited is a loss. This leads to LGBTQ+ people being two times more likely to face mental health struggles than heterosexual individuals.
However the term, “queerbaiting” itself has been changed and rearranged over time, and is still constantly evolving.
In the 1950s, the United States was in a state of a ‘Lavender scare.’ This defines a time when others labeled queer people that worked in governmental jobs as untrustworthy. This meant that these people had the possibility of losing their jobs, leading to LGBTQ+ people hiding their sexualities.
According to an article on the benefits of queer media, Stony Brook Media Showcase, says LGBTQ+ individuals are disproportionately affected by mental health compared to heterosexual individuals. With negative media changing, and shifting to positive media, it is important to note the media that impacted queer mental health.
The importance of queer media fluctuates, just as much as the bait media does. The impacts of each differentiate and change through time but the impact stays. The most anyone could do would be to move forward, and toward active, intentional advocacy. Support authentic representation and stray away from the bait. LGBTQ+ media, and individuals will stay, and change, the most impactful thing is to accept it, and represent it.
