Over a year ago, I wrote an article titled “Why Does Everyone on Twitter Hate Harry Styles All of a Sudden,” in which a bout of boredom and insomnia led me down the origins of the Harry Styles hate train. In it, I discussed an onslaught of queerbaiting allegations he’d been subjected to as a result of his refusal to label his sexuality. By the very end of that article, I said that the Internet often subjects themselves to the same nonsensical cycle of falling in love with the idea of these celebrities, then turning on them the second they step out of line from the fictional personas they’ve projected onto these human beings. With this conclusion of parasocial entitlement, I marked it as a complex phenomenon that necessitates its own article. This is that article.
On the 4th of January, a controversial opinion piece from The New York Times caused a bit of commotion in the Swiftie fandom. In this article, Anna Marks delivered a five thousand-word essay providing detailed accounts of Taylor Swift’s alleged queer flagging, reinforcing the decades-old “Taylor Swift is Gay” conspiracy theory, also known as Gaylor; a narrative that has existed within a small subsection of Swift’s fandom. Now, I’m more than open to queer interpretations of music and every form of art. I, myself, have an article for this very website, declaring the importance of interpreting Swift’s music from a queer perspective in my journey to accepting myself as a lesbian. But that line between “personal queer interpretation” to “public invasiveness about someone’s sexuality” starts to blur when an article like Marks’s goes through an entire vetting process and still manages to get published on a platform as big as The New York Times. It didn’t get any better when CNN released an article the very next day condemning the piece, with what fans assumed were direct sources from Swift’s team. As a result, Swiftie Twitter erupted with mixed reactions, with some Gaylors admitting defeat and others taking the reactionary approach by calling Swift a queerbaiter.
Celebrity queerbaiting, in its very essence, can be a claim that causes some to jokingly clarify their heterosexuality, and at its very worst, forces them out of the closet. A couple of years ago the Heartstopper star Kit Connor was forcibly outed on Twitter, writing “Back for a minute. I’m bi. Congrats for forcing an 18 year old to out himself. I think some of you missed the point of the show. Bye.” This was after a substantial portion of the Heartstopper fanbase labeled him as a queerbaiter in response to speculations about his alleged romantic involvement with Maia Reficco.
Throwing the word queerbaiting at every celebrity in existence who hasn’t made a coming-out announcement, a la Ellen Degeneres 1997 TIME Magazine cover, feels like a reinforcement of heteronormative talking points in which “straight is the default.” In the journey for queer liberation, dismantling the othering of queerness is necessary for removing our inherent heteronormative biases. When we’ve gotten to this point of progression where celebrities feel like they don’t need to come out, this is a sign of the normalization of queerness within, at the very least, a Western context. Reverting into mandating queer labels for something complex and personal feels like a step backward. These are real people and the entitlement these fans have for a label could only be classified as parasocial and invasive.
And I’m not here to be overtly critical of queer fanbases. There are no hard lines that can be drawn or an instruction manual in navigating the speculation of sexualities. I do this every so often when I’m at a bar and spot an attractive woman. Queer people do this innately and fall on subtle hints, physical presentations, and fashion statements as a way to flag their queerness to others in the community. Even then, sometimes flagging isn’t representative of the nature of someone’s sexuality.
Similar to Kit Connor, Billie Eilish had recently felt like she was outed by an interviewer who directly asked her if she meant to come out in the Variety article where she said, “I’m attracted to [girls] as people. I’m attracted to them for real.” Though Eilish responded nonchalantly saying she thought everyone knew, she went on Instagram to express that she felt like she was outed and emphasized that her romantic preferences should not be a subject of public discussion. Even the interviewer, who identifies as queer herself, went on Shannon Beveridge’s podcast to express confusion about the situation and that she had no intention of outing Eilish. This just shows that these lines are blurry for everyone, even those who mean no harm in their speculation.
The problem at hand isn’t the speculation of sexuality, it is the sensationalization of celebrity queerness and the invasive nature of these conversations. Sometimes it’s just easy to call a spade for what it is. Creating threads of “proof” and then starting an upheaval if your narrative proves to be false is unnecessarily childish. A lot of these celebrities perceive their sexualities as separate from their jobs. If you crave personal representation in celebrity culture, look for artists who find their queerness inherently tied to their art. Stop looking for it in the personal lives of others.