#if they had a queer woman as showrunner this season

[metabolizemotions]

They only fetishize queer people. Especially our pain. We are not real, entire human beings to them. The celebrate the straight couples - their relationship, intimacy n all; fetishize the bodies of queer men; n fetishize the idea of queer women.

The extent to which they tolerate our sexuality is the short snippets in promo clips. They only want to exploit our online engagement. Ironically our viewership might be bringing in the ad buyers who r trying to erase us.

They try to erase the specificity of the "queer" part, but only use the pain, the convenient stereotypes, the virtue-signaling part to gain brownie points n for good drama. They joke about cultural appropriation n did exactly that during the pride episode with the straight couple's proposal. Same-sex marriage. What are you talking about? It's about queer hate n straight allyship.

They capitalize on the "women" part, to further fetishize our biology. So if it's 2 women in a relationship - it's double the drama about making babies, bad genes, n jokes about hormones n our body parts. But it's 2 women, how can they possibly manage w/o "big, strong, sensitive", straight men with good genes to contribute n overflowing empathy to deal with them being emotional n hormonal?

It's 5b, it's pride, it's the burning man all over again. First they elevate Jack, now Beckett. Pride was about cheating queer men n high queer woman. An intimate scene of Marina must be minimized n hidden among the others' or edited to death in a montage. It's as scary as a man burning to death.

The fact that they haven't even shared a proper kiss this season through any joyful or emotional moment... They just come up with more ways to obscure the kiss, if any. Bad lighting, bad angles n bad editing are prerequisites. They r also written into the script.

Of course they make an important life decision in the NICU, n it's completely inappropriate for a married w|w to share a quick kiss - which we saw via the back of their heads. Unlike a gay man having sex with an ex at the funeral of the ex's dad - while cheating on his partner - twice. Perfectly lit with no obstructions of course.

Even in their ugly kitchen they're assigned, with a perfectly good scene setup, nope. Too brightly lit for queer woman - save it for a long morning kiss b/w gay men in their nice kitchen.

Emotional scene about Carina's fertility issues and reciprocal IVF - okay a kiss allowed grudgingly - but just 0.5 sec. Their lips touched. You get the idea. Why are you fans so demanding? Time is reserved for the 101th proposal of the straight couple n their extended kisses. A proper Marina love scene? You perverts. More explicit sex scenes b/w straight couples are needed.

I don't want to rehash about Jack. I've said plenty about Beckett. Just that men's mistakes are dismissed and minimized. It is not enough to show every painful step of Maya apologizing and making amends. Maya and Carina must also be used to make the audience sympathize with Jack and Beckett. It is a deliberate yet thoughtless choice to use Carina's SA trauma to sympathize with Jack. Just as it is to use Maya's family trauma to sympathize with Beckett. Esp the context of the shot. It is esp violating. They might as well just get Jack to show up for this. They never really got it, did they?

However one chooses to justify these choices, it's not only unnec but wrong to include the men. Esp not Beckett - the man who bullied her for months till her breakdown. Even if he never apologized and they insist on using Maya's pain to make him look good in his redemption arc, idc at this point, but this is just not the time.

If it must be a man, get Travis. Make it a conversation b/w queer people, about queer hate, about their families. Travis sympathizing with Maya, about a journey he wouldn't know about. Way better than jokes on hormones with the guys. A cheap way to get a laugh at an arduous process. I thought we left 5b n mocking queer women behind.

It could have been one beautiful scene with Andy and Vic. They haven't had a proper one since s1 & 2. They would have understood about Mason, if not for their long friendship, there's 703. It could have been about the pain women go thru - Andy and Vic about their abortions or Maya about experiencing what Carina underwent... The show really isn't big on female camaraderie.

But it should really be Carina. Among all the scenes of Carina in the station bathroom - which have been a lot - this is probably the most appropriate if they must set it there. Definitely more so that her own insemination, which was ridiculous.

These are moments that they should only share with each other, privately n intimately. These precious moments that are dwindling - few n short to begin with. It's not irl, it's one scene in an ensemble show. They sure could have romanticized this. It doesn't even have to be half as dramatic as a regular scene of their golden couple. D & S will create magic.

Esp in this episode, there's so much to unpack. With everything they've been thru on their own, the ending could have been about them at home, checking in n sharing their day. Talking about the lawsuit, the hate on queers, their brothers, the boundaries they had to set with their families... Doing the trigger shot together - esp after their emotional scene in 705 n to cap off the morning scene. A perfect setup for their emotional n physical intimacy.

But of course it didn't happen. Other important moments in their lives about their new home n new baby were also short parts of wordless montages. They are even less important than scenes of the others having drinks n sex.

Queer women just don't matter.

[letmetellyouaboutmyfeels]

why are people so against oliver and ryan talking about buddie, don't we want this, don't we want buddie to be canon? i'm sorry are we rooting for buck to end up with tommy or something, like I don't understand why so many people are saying stop asking them about buddie?

If we want Buddie then shouldn't we be asking buddie questions? I mean I'm so sorry but I'm just very confused, shouldn't we be happy that buddie is getting this much press and love? Why are we against it?

Okay, this is going to be a long one.

There are a few reasons why people are concerned about publications teasing Buddie happening and using the ship name and asking Oliver and Ryan about the ship. I'll try to be as concise as possible.

I would like to note, I'm not going to answer a bunch of questions about this. Other people have answered similar questions plenty of times, if you take a bit to look around 911blr. I'm sure @catdadeddie has gone into this a few times.

However, I understand that we are getting a lot of new fans this season, and so I want to try and explain comprehensively for those who haven't been around. I hope this covers everything.

Whenever a ship is between two people of the same gender as opposed to two people of the opposite gender (I know, I know, but we can't get into the gender spectrum right now just play along with me), everyone involved has to be very, very careful when it comes to talking about that ship ahead of said ship going canon.

It is very easy to slip into something called "queerbaiting." I'm assuming that you and most people online and in fandom by now have heard of this term but just in case: queerbaiting is when a show acts like a queer ship might happen in marketing and promotion in order to draw in a queer audience.

Historically, this was done by having a main character played by a woman have a romantic thing with another woman (flirting, even kissing!) who was a guest star, hinting at the main character's bisexuality/queerness, only for that guest star to never come back and for the show to act like it had never happened. This was done during something called, IIRC, "sweeps week" which was basically an important week for TV viewer ratings in the 90s. It was a way to boost your numbers by drawing in queer viewers with the promise of actual queer rep that then wasn't realized. It's a marketing tactic.

Nowadays the nature of queerbaiting has changed a bit. It's an overused term that frankly people love to (mis)use whenever a ship of theirs doesn't go canon and a show dares to do things like having two people (like say Ryan and Oliver) who play the two halves of the ship do an interview together (whether you ship Buddie or not, they are close friends, and it makes sense that they'd do a few interviews together - that is not queerbaiting). A good example of real queerbaiting is Rizzoli & Isles which, among other things, took out billboards and magazine spreads showing the characters (two women) in suggestively sexual and romantic positions and with slogans hinting that the two had more than just friendship together, then never, ever delivered on it and in fact laughed at the idea of the characters being gay for each other.

(I WAS THERE, GANDALF!!!)

Because of this unfortunate treatment of queer audiences and the (historic) dearth of actual queer characters and queer ships going canon (it's getting better but still), networks, showrunners, and so on have to be very careful when, say, they want to make a queer ship canon.

Look at how ABC handled Chenford, a popular ship in their show The Rookie. Chenford was not a planned ship - the fans adored the chemistry between the two characters (Lucy Chen and Tim Bradford), the writers liked the idea and decided to lean into it, ABC gave the go-ahead, and the ship officially got together and went canon last season. ABC heavily promoted Chenford and the ship and made a lot of jokes about it in the last couple of seasons leading into the ship going canon, using the ship heavily in their marketing.

ABC cannot necessarily do that with Buddie, because even if Buddie is going canon, until that happens, they could get accused of queerbaiting. There's a much bigger minefield to navigate because of this historic misuse of queer audiences and queer characters.

So whenever journalists and publications use a popular non-canonical queer ship name for clicks and fandom interest, if that ship doesn't immediately go canon or if the network/showrunner/etc doesn't say "yeah they're totally gonna kiss! with tongue!" people accuse the show of queerbaiting. This is unfair to the show for two reasons: one, the network is not going to bother sending "shut the fuck up" letters to every single damn publication out there for using a ship name in their headline and talking about a ship - they'll be accused of homophobia and it draws even MORE attention to the issue re: the Barbra Streisand effect (look it up); and two, the people involved in the show are NOT going to spoil the anticipation and surprise by admitting ANY ship is going to go canon before it does.

This is simple marketing - the movie trailer doesn't (or shouldn't, anyway) show you the ending of the movie or everything that happens in it. TV shows want you to tune in every week and speculate and guess. They're not gonna spoil a ship ahead of time.

This means that when journalists and articles pull this shit, they're putting the showrunner, the writers, the actors doing interviews, and the network in a bad situation that they can't really do anything about. Not without causing more mess.

So that's reason number one why a lot of us are annoyed: by yelling about Buddie, these articles and journalists are setting the cast and crew we love up to get yelled at for queerbaiting if Buddie doesn't immediately happen, and there's nothing the cast and crew can do about it, and it's all so the journalists and articles can use us, the fandom, for clicks. So we're also kinda getting used here, and it doesn't feel great.

The second reason we're annoyed about Buddie questions is that it's being asked of the actors who, nine times out of ten, have ZERO CONTROL OVER THE STORYLINES.

Now, there are exceptions. Jennifer Love Hewitt, who plays Maddie, has pushed back on a couple storylines that were given to her and has therefore had a strong hand in shaping Maddie's character. One infamous (in a positive way) example is that Maddie and Eddie were supposed to be an endgame couple. JLH, however, immediately loved the character of Chimney and clicked with Chim's actor Kenneth Choi, so she asked if Maddie could get with Chim instead, feeling he'd be a better fit for her character. And lo, both the beautiful ship Madney and the insanity that is Buddie shipping was born because Buck ended up stepping into that co-parenting-Chris role that Maddie obviously would've originally filled.

However, it should be noted that JLH was an established star before coming onto 9-1-1, and her husband is friends with Tim the showrunner. I would argue that the only other two actors who have any power on their storylines are Peter and Angela, the latter because she can do whatever she wants forever, and the former because (like Angela) he is an executive producer on the show.

It's not that actors never ever get to have a say ever, but the writers, showrunner, and network have much more power. They create the storylines, they make the decisions. Not actors. So when the actors are repeatedly asked about a ship, they're put in an awkward position where they might not even know the full storyline for their character that season and now they need to answer in a way that doesn't reveal any information they do know, but also doesn't insult shippers or dash their hopes. This is a double minefield for queer ships because, again: historic insults to queer fans and characters, nobody wants to be offensive.

The third reason is that this fandom has, historically, treated Tim, Oliver, and others like absolute dogshit over Buddie not going canon. Oliver's left Twitter and taken big social media breaks because of how he was yelled at online. It's not cool, guys. Vent all you want but directing it at the cast and crew isn't okay and maybe if it was just you talking sternly that would be fine (maybe) but when it's dozens of people? It's bullying. Full stop.

Every single time Buddie has not gone canon instantly, the actors and others have gotten verbally abused on social media. Every time the actors have been asked about Buddie and not said "ohmygod yes I want it to happen so bad" (they are not allowed to say this because it might create false hope because again: historical queerbaiting) they've gotten yelled at. We are tired of the actors getting yelled at over something over which they have no control.

The fourth reason is that Oliver, especially, has gotten asked about Buddie a LOT. A lot. The poor man is very tired. He's been cornered about Buddie and asked about it aggressively by certain journalists (one journalist, Max Gao, actually tried to corner Gavin who plays Chris over Buddie - this was a few years ago so Gavin was even younger than he is now and I personally think that is an incredibly unfairly loaded question to give to a child).

If I may dive into speculation for a moment, given how the actors have been SO gleeful about the move to ABC, the fact that they've admitted ABC is letting them do storylines and little moments that FOX wouldn't, and a few other things I won't get into here because this damn thing is long enough already... I suspect FOX would not let Buddie happen. If this is the case, then actors being asked about Buddie is even more loaded because they are being asked questions about it and they can't say "yeah we want to but the network won't let us." THEY WILL GET FIRED FOR THIS.

But, whether or not my speculation is true, the fact remains that when you are repeatedly, over and over, aggressively asked if this fan ship is going to happen or not, you get tired. There's only so many times that someone can give a diplomatic answer before you just want to snap "stop fucking asking me!" Journalists love to take advantage of fandom and social media chatter to get attention for their articles so asking over and over again about Buddie isn't because they genuinely care or think it'll happen, it's to get shippers reading their article, and so bombarding the actors and writers with this question when they've already kinda said their peace a lot about it is frustrating. Just! Leave them alone!

And AGAIN: if this was a M/F ship there could maybe be room for teasing the will-they-won't-they but because of historically bad treatment of queer characters and fans, THEY CANNOT DO THAT. So the only option open to them is to KEEP THEIR MOUTHS SHUT. And keeping one's mouth shut and threading that diplomatic needle for years is EXHAUSTING.

We do want Buddie to be canon, nonny, and in my opinion we are going to get it. All this recent PR supports that, (again: in my opinion).

However, we have seen Oliver get bombarded with what he thinks about Buddie until the cows come home, and he deserves a break. There's nothing new he can say, there's nothing new he's allowed to say. We have seen other parts of the fandom scream that we're being queerbaited because Buddie didn't instantly go canon, without any consideration for the fact that a) queerbaiting is a marketing tactic and b) there might be other factors at play preventing it going canon. We have seen journalists take advantage of us, the shippers, in order to get attention, and we have seen them create an awkward and embarrassing atmosphere in interviews by repeatedly asking about the ship. We have seen shippers make us look bad by hounding the cast and crew on social media about Buddie, treating every woman actress who plays a Buck/Eddie love interest like shit (yes, I know about Edy, but she could be a saint and parts of the fandom would still go onto Instagram to call her names), and generally being absolute pills that would tempt any showrunner, actor, or writer to say "y'know what fuck 'em let's not make Buddie canon I'm not rewarding this shitty behavior."

"If we want Buddie then shouldn't we be asking Buddie questions?" No. Not like journalists and fans have been. It's something to bring up - in my opinion - sparingly and with an awareness of how queer storylines and ships and fandom have been mocked, ignored, baited, and so on over the years. They don't ask about Buddie because they give a shit. They ask because they want our clicks for their ad revenue and they want our retweets and likes and comments. And it's certainly not something to bombard the actors with on social media and bitch at them if it doesn't happen. It just makes the rest of fandom look bad and makes us look like children.

Additionally: These are not new questions! They're not only asking these questions now that it looks like Buddie will go canon, with serious hope and consideration based on the marketing and storylines. They've been asking this since season fucking two, when Buddie was clearly not planned, just to get fangirl (gn) clicks. They wanted to get attention and teehee over how Oliver/Ryan/whoever reacted to people thinking Buck and Eddie should touch dicks. 'Kay?

We know the pattern. So when every piece of media is screaming BUDDIE!!! we are not seeing it as "OMG could we go canon?" We see it as another round of being taken advantage of for article attention, another round of parts of the fandom being bullies and yelling about being baited, and another round of the actors being backed into uncomfortable corners.

That's why we're concerned, worried, and annoyed.

*collapses* I hope this covered everything and explained it all.

[bogunicorn]

I think it says a lot about the shitty way queer people are treated that my reaction to the extremely obvious Cressida/Eloise chemistry this season is paranoia and suspicion rather than just seeing something with my eyes and trusting that that is, in fact, what I am seeing.

Cressida is obviously being set up to marry Debling to avoid being forced into a marriage set by her father, and characters won't stop reminding the audience that Debling is going to immediately disappear for years after the season and leave his wife to run his estate and live whatever life she wants while he's away. Violet has consciously given up trying to encourage Eloise to find a husband, and instead their conversations are about how Eloise needs a friend other than Cressida. They use the same language that the hetero couples use (Cressida calling Eloise not wanting her friendship earlier as "rejecting my suit," Eloise calling on Cressida the way a male suitor would, seeking each other out anytime they're at a shared function), and Cressida's father warning her to stay away from Eloise is straight out of the coming-of-age queer romances I read as a teenager. It's shot like a romance. If they went full Tipping the Velvet in ep 5, I wouldn't be at all surprised. The showrunner is also a gay man whom I would hope isn't stupid enough to be writing them like this "by accident."

It's also really clear this season that the writers have been listening to the show's reception and answering critiques in-universe. It can be a little obvious, but I don't think any of it is mockery or pandering. Violet is genuinely more helpful instead of pushing her kids into situations, Danbury and Charlotte talked about how the "season diamond" thing is Whistledown's terminology rather than the actual title of the role, Kanthony gets ep 1 spotlight and an actual explanation for why they're not around unlike Daphne and Simon, Eloise has been allowed to grow instead of being pigeonholed as the humorless obnoxious SJW. It would make sense to me that they would have also paid attention to the conversation about Benedict possibly being bisexual and realized that viewers would be accepting of and even enjoy Eloise being bisexual in the main text.

I'm getting into pure speculation here, but I also don't think thos production team expects to get the full 8 seasons. Netflix just doesn't produce dramas that go that long. My speculation is that they more or less have the greenlight for season 4 and MAYBE season 5. 4 is obviously going to be Benedict and Sophie, and my suspicion is that they have 5 earmarked for Francesca, since IIRC in her book she's a widow and s3 has her meeting her husband. They've done basically nothing with Sir Phillip and seemed to have put a bow on Marina's storyline in a way that I think would make it jarring to have them circle back to her and be like "she's dead now and this nothingburger husband is going to hook up with Eloise." They had chances, limited as they were, to have Philip make a memorable impression or have some foreshadowing between him and Eloise for the future and didn't even bother with lip service. I don't think THEY think they'll even get to Eloise's season.

Again, that's entirely speculation based on my gut feeling. But my point is that the show has put itself into a position where I think only the most diehard book fans would complain if Eloise's big love interest is a woman, and the show obviously gave up on catering to book accuracy ages ago.

[tevanbegins]

This is a long rant to shoot down mad BoB theories insisting that Tommy is a villain / secret spy in cahoots with Gerrard / plot device / temporary LI. The show's writers are mature adults who surely wouldn't go so out of the way to villainize a queer character? To the extent that he'd fool all the main characters into thinking he was a good guy and great for Buck for an entire season, and then start revealing his true colors in the next season? To make a beautiful storyline about queer joy blow up into flames with such a major negative plot twist? All so that Eddie can suddenly realise he is gay and he and Buck can get together? I seriously don't think a 60 year old showrunner would allow such childish nonsense to happen on his show.

I'm not saying queer characters can't play dark / negative roles — Eva's character is an example from this very show itself. But the writers always told us that she is a bad influence on Hen's life right from the start, never got us attached to her by depicting her as a great person in the beginning and then revealing later that she is bad. If Tommy was meant to be horrible for Buck, the narrative would clearly tell us that from the start the way they did with Eva and Hen. The writers cannot be so insensitive as to give the LGBTQ+ community such significant mlm representation with Buck and Tommy, first making us fall in love with their romance and then humiliating us (as well as Buck) by completely destroying Tommy's character — all to serve the end purpose of making a fanon ship go canon? That might happen in B*ddie fanfics written by teenagers, but it can't happen on a show being written for a sensible, mature audience by grown-ass career TV writers!!!

B*ddie would have happened a long time ago if the writers wanted to make it canon. They are not going to do it now, definitely not by making Tommy the scapegoat in that awful mess, just so the toxic portion of the fandom can be appeased over the rest of the audiences who appreciate the show for its thoughtful and sensitive storytelling.

Why is maligning Tommy even necessary to make B*ddie canon? Like Eddie and Buck have seen each other dating one woman after another through the seasons but only Tommy being the bad guy will suddenly lead to a feelings realisation arc? Why didn't it happen before, or why couldn't it happen without reintroducing Tommy if B*ddie canon was always the end plan? Probably because the writers aren't interested in going there at all, and Tommy is genuinely being written as a long-term LI for Buck?

Backing this argument is the fact that most of the conversations had by the other characters after Buck's coming out have not been explicitly about him now identifying as bisexual, but more about him being involved with Tommy. If Tommy was being written as a plot device or a short-term LI, I don't think the other characters (including Eddie, mind you) would be hyping him up during these conversations. The writers would have probably framed the conversations on the lines of, "Oh wow Buck you realised you're bisexual? Congratulations!" instead of "OMG you and Tommy? Tell us more / We love him for you and approve of you two together!" They wouldn't take the efforts they've been taking to make Tommy a pivotal subject of these conversations if he was just a plot device as the BoBs believe. And if he was supposed to be a villain, the other characters would have told Buck to find someone better if they thought Tommy's vibes were off. Not all of them can be foolish to not see through Tommy if he was truly as bad as BoBs say he is (especially not Bobby.) Yes, Buck's bisexuality is valid regardless of who he dates or even if he doesn't, but the fact the characters talk so positively about both him + Tommy during these convos clearly implies this is an important love story blended into the coming out arc.

If B*ddie canon was in the works, JLH and Kenny Choi wouldn't have said on their IG lives that it's not going to happen, Ryan Guzman wouldn't be referring to Eddie as heterosexual, etc. So, we cannot let the BoB comments get into our heads because they are not the ones writing the show. I think we can expect a lot better from Tim & Co. than them giving in to the delusional fantasies BoBs want to see being manifested. Wanted to say this piece because I am fed up of seeing the BoB conspiracy theories all over and don't want to give them the power to steal our joy. That's all for now!

___

[blackbird-brewster]

Meta: Jemily Queerbaiting

With the huge influx of posts saying 'Jemily is gonna be canon', I really appreciated seeing this post because OP was completely correct. I didn't want to write an entire dissertation as a reply, so I'm making my own post with my personal opinion on this. (All sources are noted in footnotes)

Before I began this rant, for anyone who thinks this is anti-Jemily. It is not. I have shipped Jemily for 18 friggin years and that's never going to change. This post is specifically my thoughts about queer baiting.

First off, I need to note that the showrunners (and the cast members who use social media) KNOW what a huge queer following this show has and that's why we got pansexual Tara Lewis in S16 [1]. Which, in itself, was SOOOOOOO important!!! Our first canonically queer main in SIXTEEN seasons was a middle-aged Black woman!!! That's phenomenal. (The fact it was horrible rep, because they instantly ruined her relationships once her queerness served it's plot point is a whole other post entirely)

In my opinion, the 'big Jemily moment' Paget posted about on Twitter [2] (and AJ hinted at during a recent IG live) is simply queerbaiting to get people to watch S17. I know a lot of you are newer to the fandom and I love your enthusiasm, I really do, ship and let ship, but listen, let's be real, Jemily is not going to be made canon. The showrunners aren't going to suddenly say (after 17 seasons) 'Surprise, Jemily is endgame'. This show has never cared about queer rep and now that CBS/Paramount have already ticked their queer rep box with Tara, they won't be in any rush to add any other characters to it.

Please buckle in, I've got a lot of thoughts on this matter --

What is Queerbaiting?

If you aren't aware of what queerbaiting is, here's a good definition:

Historically, queerbaiting has carried two meanings: the first is an act of aggressive heterosexuality to shut down queer subtext on screen while still teasing and catering to the queer audience in advertising, public relations, and fan engagement strategies; the second is an existing homoerotic tension between two characters played up on screen while met with derision by the professionals behind the scenes. [3]

The Medium article quoted here is from 2017, a time when parasocial relationships were really starting to take over social media. In 2024, actors are now only a mention or tag away online, they have direct conversations with fans, and this process has allowed for an even deeper form of queerbaiting.

Oftentimes online, actors are asked directly about certain ships and while some ignore these questions (usually to avoid breaking their contracts or other repercussions), others (looking at you, Paget) choose to instead tease fans about queer ships. She's done this for years upon years and if I've learned anything in the past twenty-years of existing in fandom spaces it's this -- don't hold your breath. In it's original meaning, for something to be deemed as queerbaiting there had to be malicious, or at least, purposeful intent to string queer fans along by teasing them with suggestive content about the ship in question, while knowing this ship will never come to fruition in canon.

The thing to remember is, Paget and AJ aren't the only ones who know about Jemily shippers -- the network and showrunners are well aware of this ship too. When networks/showrunners figure out they have a strong sapphic fanbase, they love to use that to their advantage to get more viewers and higher ratings. Queerbaiting is a goldmine to keep fans watching long running shows, look at Rizzoli and Isles, Supergirl, and OUAT for examples of this.

Jemily and Queerbaiting:

Ever since Emily joined the BAU in S2 (2006), there have always been fans who ship JJ/Emily (shoutout to the old LJ forums!). Way before celebs were just a tweet away from fans, back when all our fics began with disclaimers so we wouldn't get sued by networks, we went to great lengths to keep our fanworks far removed from actors/showrunners attention.

As far as Jemily goes, this reply from Paget in a 2009 interview with TVGuide.com [4] (which has now been deleted from their site unfortunately, but there are quotes on Tumblr still [4.a]) confirmed some fans' worst fear -- the actors had found our fanworks online.

TVGuide.com: Of course, a band of fans want her to hook up with Hotch.

Brewster: I know! I didn't realize that fans make these videos on YouTube? A.J. Cook sent me a hilarious one that made it look like Prentiss and J.J. were having a secret lesbian affair. You know, when Hotch was blown up in the SUV, we shot this scene where he's in the hospital and I'm standing next to him, looking at his bleeding ear. Our director came in and said, "Paget, you're looking at Hotch like you're in love with him. It looks really weird." So now, every day, Thomas [Gibson] and I flutter our eyelids at each other.

This was the first time I recall anyone acknowledging Jemily shippers publicly and at the time (Jan 2009), the show was still in Season Four (just before CBS fired both AJ and Paget [5]). Paget genuinely said it's 'hilarious' that fans shipped JJ/Emily. Even now, I'll see people say 'We know Paget and AJ have seen Jemily fanvids, so they obviously ship it too' -- but those same people rarely acknowledge the full context of the original answer. Paget not only thought JJ/Emily were 'hilarious', but then she doubled down and turned her reply back to how she and Thomas liked to play up the chemistry between Emily/Hotch.

While no one can say for sure which video it was that AJ sent Paget, just knowing they were watching JJ/Emily fanvids sent a bit of a shockwave through the femslash side of the fandom. To some it felt like an invasion of privacy, fanworks are by fans for fans -- knowing the cast were poking around in fandom spaces added an extra layer of worry around what we fans were posting online. Fifteen years ago, it used to be quite taboo for actors to outwardly discuss shipping or other fanon for whatever show they were in, and we fans were usually comfortably removed from the actors altogether.

Of course, now it's the norm for fans and actors/showrunners to co-exist online and interact with one another. This connection has opened new ways for shows to queerbait their fans. Pretty much every show has some form of social media account now and there is no doubt that the people running those accounts keep up with the most popular ships and hashtags. Not to mention that actors are constantly barraged with questions about whether they ship their character with x,y,z, or whether they think a ship should be made canon, etc. These interactions only serve to benefit the shows themselves, because whether the conversation is for or against a certain ship, it's all just free publicity (Why do you think CM now has a TikTok account?)

Every time AJ or Paget say anything about Jemily, the queer side of the fandom loses their minds. But this has been going on for YEARS now and every single time, it turns out to be nothing but social media hype and queerbaiting. Remember this AJ post? [6] Or what about the notorious reply by Paget to a fan, where she talks about how she and AJ held hands under the table 'for the shippers' [7] I've seen this cycle over and over again, so perhaps I am cynical, but I'm not getting my hopes up that Jemily will ever seriously be canon.

It's widely known now, after both Kirsten [8] and Paget [9] have talked about it, that there was an early idea where Prentiss was supposed to be queer, but that was ultimately scraped before it ever made it on screen. For context, please remember, this show has been airing for nearly twenty years. It began in 2005, during the highly conservative Bush administration. Queer people didn't have rights in the US, we couldn't get married, we were rarely protected under discrimination laws, and we could even be fired for simply being queer (in some states). Diverse queer representation on screen was extremely limited to things like 'The L Word' and 'Queer as Folk' (both aired on Showtime, so they were behind a paywall. And as far as tLw goes, that show was extremely male-gaze focused and is horrible in nearly all regards if you try to rewatch it now). As far as prime time shows went, queer rep was even more rare. Which is why Emily wasn't queer from the get-go.

Yes, things have changed since 2006 in terms of queer rep on TV. We have a myriad of queer identities represented in TV and film nowadays, which is why I think it's so easy for newer fans to say 'lf she was supposed to be gay anyway, they should just make Emily queer in canon!' I know this is what fuels most fans' demands for Emily being confirmed queer, and I get it, I DO. I would be all for it! However, I do not, in one hundred years, actually believe that is going to happen after they already canonically queer confirmed Tara in S16. The fact we even got ONE queer character is ground-breaking for this show.

It's also worth noting, that in the time between Paget's departure in 2012 and her return in 2016, she became very active on Twitter. This was when more and more fans began asking her about Jemily and after Kirsten's AfterEllen interview, fans also pushed for Paget to address the possibility of Emily being gay. 'Pushed' is actually an understatement for some of the outright harassment she would receive. (AJ received some of this harassment too, but less so because she doesn't use social media ass often) Back then, neither of them replied to these things directly. Yet, no matter what either woman posted, the replies were full of Jemily stans begging for her acknowledgement. (Did you know 'stan' is literally a term coined for stalker fans?) I remember one time AJ's friend was missing and she posted info on her IG about it, you know what the replies were? People asking her about Jemily. It was genuinely sickening.

Within this context, it was no surprise to fans when Emily came back in S12 , she and JJ's friendship was seemingly erased. The two women were rarely on screen together in the late seasons, plus the writers saw fit to even give Emily not only one (Mark in London, but two, on-screen boyfriends for the first time in the entire series. I personally do not think these changes to Emily's character were coincidence, I saw the hellscape of what people would say to AJ and Paget online and I fully believe that upon Paget's return to the show, the showrunners purposely tried to distance JJ and Emily to dissuade the more abusive side of the fanbase.

Can I prove that, no. But it is the only reason I can think of as to why Emily S12+ seemingly didn't care about JJ anymore, despite their deep and meaningful friendship. I mean, they both CROSSED THE WORLD to go rescue each other in prior canon -- but when Emily comes back, they acted like they barely knew each other. This was even more prevalent in S16, when JJ's main storylines all revolved around Will, and Emily barely looked at JJ in the entirety of ten episodes. (Remember how Prentiss didn't even hug JJ after bomb, but she did go hug Luke?)

So, do Paget and AJ earnestly ship Jemily, or are they continuing the long tradition of queerbaiting us? Who fucking knows, not me. But based on the history of this fandom, I think I can make a safe bet. (Interestingly, if you search all of Paget's twitter for the word 'Jemily' [10] she only has 3 direct tweets mentioning the ship. I don't think it's a coincidence that two are within the past few months since they started filming S17 (the other one was a RT of Kirsten (who tagged something Jemily)

This is all to say --

Just because Paget and AJ have publicly talked about Jemily,, this doesn't mean it's ever going to happen on screen. And you know what, THAT'S OKAY!! There has been this constant outcry (after Tara became queer confirmed) of 'Do Emily next' or 'Why wasn't it Emily with a girlfriend!?' and 'Jemily needs to be canon in S17!' -- as if people believe their ships aren't worth anything unless they are canon.

That couldn't be further from the truth! Fandom is built on headcanons and fan interpretations and rare pairs and all types of shippers. Your ship does NOT need to be canon for you to enjoy it. I will ship Jemily forever, no matter what. I don't think there will be some magical queer plot in S17, at best, we might actually get to see Emily/JJ on screen together again and after the train wreck that was S16 -- I'll take whatever I can get.

And hey -- if I am completely wrong, if Erica Messer pulls a Korrasami out of her hat, I will be ecstatic. I will be happy to be proved wrong, but at the same time, I'm not going to lose sleep over it and I'm DEFINITELY not going to go hound the actors about it on social media.

Sources:

[1] 2022 Digital Spy article about the importance of Tara's coming out

[2] 04/18/24 Paget Tweet

[3] 2017 Queerbaiting article from medium.com

[4] 2009 Broken TVGuide link

[4.a] Tumblr quote from the above TVGuide Interview

[5] 2010 Kirsten interview screenrant.com

[6] 2019 AJ Instagram Post

[7] 2020 Paget video on Twitter (via @karasluthqr)

[8] 2015 Kirsten interview AfterEllen.com

[9] 2016 Paget Interview CriminalMindsFans.com

[10] @PagetPaget search 'Jemily'

[saintdollyparton]

while i’m happy to be getting a lead wlw character, i’m actually devastated that it’s not eloise. I truly cannot fathom why they’d give that storyline to Francesca when they’ve been clearly setting it up for eloise and benedict since season 1… if we somehow get both eloise and franny as queer, i’ll be ecstatic. but I just can’t see them making 3 of them queer. :( i feel like i’m more disappointed with this than not having any of them be gay because it’s like… ugh we were so close! we could’ve had it all!

I've had all the same feelings as you, but after a week to think about it and read all of the statements from the showrunner/cast, I'm more optimistic than anything.

Shondaland is known for having multiple queer storylines over the course of multiple seasons, which is something Bridgerton is set up to have. They've confirmed that each Bridgerton should get their own season.

Jess Brownell, the showrunner, is a queer woman and is very passionate about representation. She's very aware of the fandom's attachment to queer Eloise, and has said that isn't off the table, but also feels like Eloise isn't in that headspace right now. She wants to see more of the world and try and make a difference. Fingers crossed that Eloise's time spent with Michaela and Francesca will open up her eyes to her options.

Luke Thompson has confirmed that Benedict is pansexual, and we are all assuming that Sophie is still going to be his love interest. (I can't see them changing such a popular pairing.)

I'm unsure if they're going for a bisexual storyline with Frannie, or if she's meant to be a lesbian with comphet. In the books, she very much loved John and they had a happy marriage. She appears to genuinely love him in the show, too, but multiple people have pointed out that her reaction to their wedding kiss was... unenthused. She looked disappointed. So whether she's bi or a lesbian, she's sapphic because she will end up with Michaela.

That leaves Eloise, who, at the end of the day, I do believe actually felt something real for Theo. But I also think she connects with people more on an intellectual/emotional level, then starts to develop romantic and sexual feelings for them. In that way, I'd place money on Eloise being like bi demisexual, with probably a preference for women because men who would live up to her standards are hella rare. (A lot of bisexual women feel this way lol.)

All this to say, I don't think it's unrealistic for all three of them to be canon LGBT. Especially when you spread it out over several seasons and there are FIVE other Bridgertons in straight relationships.

I do agree that Frannie was a bit out of left field, but it was a pleasant surprise, to be sure. Holding out hope for Creloise, though.

[sevensoulmates]

Season 7 Press Article Buddie Analysis

Okay I don't usually write meta/spec on press runs/articles but I found these super fascinating today, especially in comparison to how the showrunners (including Tim himself) and the actors have spoken about their arcs in the past.

First I want to say that in these interviews the goal is never actually to give the audience any important information but rather to tease, and purposely be as vague as possible. So most of what they're saying will likely have double meanings and all of them are being extremely careful with the words they choose to say. Now with that out of the way in the first EW article (linked here), I found several things extremely interesting.

Calling Marisol Eddie's "Hardware store flirtation". It's so funny to me, for one, but it's also interesting that that's all she's reduced to. A flirtation. I know that was really all they were in the last season, but we know Marisol's involved (likely minorly) in at least 2 episodes out of the first 5. Natalia on the other hand is for the most part understood to not be coming back (I would honestly be surprised given the actress is in NYC). But what's even more interesting is that Marisol is not mentioned anywhere else in either of these articles, meanwhile Oliver WAS asked about Natalia. So, I want people to keep in mind that in whatever way Marisol IS a part of this season, I SEVERELY doubt she's making it past the finale.

2. This answer about Natalia is your typical non-answer but to me, it's basically a confirmation she isn't coming back, which lends a tad bit more credibility to Tommy potentially stepping in as a LI for Buck (fingers crossed).

3. Buck is apparently called in to help talk to Christopher about dating women. Do I even really have to talk about how weird this sounds? Eddie had a whole WIFE? He dated Ana for many many months. He's currently dating hardware store flirtation Marisol right now. And yet, Ryan is claiming that Eddie feels like he doesn't know how to talk to his son about women? Enough so that he calls Buck to help? Talking to your kid about dating is a new avenue yes, but why are we acting like Eddie has never been with a woman before? Like I know last season in particular emphasized that Eddie isn't the best when it comes to dating but like ??? I swear to GOD y'all it's giving such severe compulsory heterosexuality. Eddie, my man, I hope this is indicative of where your story is going this season because it's been heading this way for many many many years. Separately, I also find the lack of mention of Shannon very interesting as well.

4. Which brings me to this part. The whole family dynamic aside...Buck's romantic relationships have been severely questionable at best the entire show. Before Abby, it's canon that all Buck did was sleep around a lot, which doesn't seem like something you wanna tell a young teen dating for the first time. So what's he gonna talk about? How women flee him? As I saw someone else say on the timeline "are the successful relationships in the room with us"? This is especially odd if the spec is true and he and Natalia broke up off-screen prior to the start of the season. Eddie, you just saw Buck have yet another failed relationship with woman #4 and your thought is that HE'S the one best suited to talk to your son? These two men are so queer and so dumb, but their hearts are in the right place.

Okay, moving on to EW article #2 linked here. Here I'm shifting a little bit more to Tim Minear, and what he's said before in the past as showrunner about Buck, Eddie, the buddifer dynamic and the buddie ship.

I have a love-hate relationship with Tim. On one hand, I think he's a far better showrunner than Kristen (for OG 911, 911 Lonestar does and always will suck ass). But on the other hand, I remember some of the things he said back when season 2 was airing. It's part of the reason why I can't take things like "he's so cute. he gets that a lot" or "does this boycrush on eddie mean you're over abby" or "you two have an adorable son" or any Big Buddie fanservice line in season 2 seriously or as any definitive proof of anything. Tim has openly admitted most of those were in season 2 to throw shippers a bone. Not to be taken seriously. And that didn't sit right with me. Very obviously, there was a shift in season 3 and no longer was buddie and shippers the butt of the joke. Season 3 is when I genuinely think the writers and Tim shifted from "haha this is funny" to "oh wait, maybe there IS something here" and obviously The Powers That Be (Fox) had some control over whether or not that happened and is honestly why I think it didn't happen in season 5 or 6 where it realistically could've fit very well after s4.

So firstly, please take everything I say with a grain of salt because Tim is a Known Liar and Word Twister and is very VERY good at saying a lot while absolutely saying nothing at all.

5. So...I find what he says in this article interesting because it's not in the first article. First, his word choice is very interesting. Using both "friendship" and "coupling" in the same sentence, which have two different connotations. Secondly, he says that "at their core" their relationship is about their friendship. When something is the core of something else, that doesn't mean that's all there is. The core may be the essence, or the foundation, or the glue of something. But it is something that is BUILT UPON, something that extends past the core. To me, it means that while the core of buddie's relationship is their friendship, their relationship encompasses much more than that. It's like those successful old married couples who say the key to being married happily for 50+ years is that "we're still best friends" or that "the key to a successful romantic relationship is having that foundation of strong friendship" etc. Now, I'm not SAYING this means canon buddie, but I just find it interesting that this is how Tim chose to describe them this time around. To me, that says Tim is very much aware that there's far more to be explored in their relationship than just their friendship. Whether that means far more buddifer family arcs, or an actual real exploration of Buck and Eddie as a romantic couple, I'm very excited to see where it goes.

[theundeadelf]

I had a much more elaborate post planned but oh god everything about Jaskier in Season 3 is so hysterical right now??

I've known that they were probably confirming his bisexuality for over a year - ever since the audition tapes for a "male royal who flirts with Jaskier" were leaked. The fact that it's a whole romance is excellent, but the theory that Jaskier's chemistry with Geralt (and Yennefer as well honestly) led the showrunners to make this change has me absolutely howling.

Oh, you want Jaskier to have a complicated relationship with a man who has long [blond] hair and he writes a sad love song about him? You want him to have an on-off relationship with a beautiful woman? We've got you! (⁠◠⁠‿⁠・⁠)⁠—⁠☆

I will always have a soft spot for Jaskier and Geralt especially. But as fun as it is to speculate in fanon, ultimately I knew it wasn't happening. I think the very best we can hope for in that direction is an acknowledgement of one-sided feelings, and to me, having Jaskier acknowledged as queer or bi - that he "doesn't see gender" - is way beyond my wildest dreams already.

I really want to know more about Radovid and Vespula! Will Geralt, Yennefer and Ciri ever find out that their bard has caught feelings?? Will Jaskier ever have to choose his family over his newfound love? They've drastically changed Radovid for the show - what implications will that have??

(Basically can it be June 29th already???)

[thekatebridgerton]

I know they're going to change Sophie I just hope they don't change everything about her. If they want to make her queer that's cool. But I will be mad if they decide they go the Strong Female Not Like The Other Girls path. That's not Sophie. This girl punched her abuser because she got sick of her mistreating her daughter.

I understand and I'm sure they won't change her personality that much, Sophie is such a resilient and kind character.

honestly don't want to get into this conversation other than to say that there is something about losing the trust of the audience and never getting it back that Bridgerton needs to work on. With time and a lot of space, I've come to understand that what was done to Michael obliterated the trust that both sides of the discourse had towards the showrunners. Which could have been avoided if there was some sort of build up towards the reveal of Michaela being a woman, maybe John could have talked about his female cousin, or maybe we could have seen some mention of a female Stirling in previous seasons.

The thing about Penelope as a love interest, is that there was a lot of build up there to position her as a love interest. Simon was introduced directly as the main romanceable character of S1 and Kate's appearance, was foreshadowed all the way to the end of s1, to the point where her appearance in s2 was expected and welcome. The show has worked to establish a void that needed to be filled in the lives of Anthony, Colin and Benedict that foreshadowed the appearance and personality of their love interest in the course of 3 seasons.

Francesca, had none of that. Furthermore the appearance of her future love interest, without any foreshadowing or previous build up, obliterated the trust the audience had in the show, when it came to future love interests. Springing a jack in the box love interest 'surprise' is only good if the surprise is something the receiver was actually looking forward to, because you let off a hint here and there. This surprise had about the same effect as a surprise marriage proposal from a person you're not sure you want to spend the rest of your life with (No shade to Penelope tho).

I keep hearing things like 'will Sophie be changed to Cressida?' or 'Will Sophie even be a woman?' and a lot of other things that basically boil down to the same question 'What will happen to Sophie? because the showrunners just proved we can't trust them anymore' and my honest reply is that, like all of you, I don't know either. There is a lot of uncertainty, that has been growing and growing ever since the show started changing major plotlines in s2, and culminated with that sucker punch to viewers trust in s3. You all have a right to be worried, I am too, for all we know Sophie could be changed into Cressida, Sienna or Theo, they could bring in Hunter Schafer to play Sophie just as they could Brandy Norwood, Manny Hacinto or Camilla Cabello. The possibilities are endless, some people will like it some will not, the common denominator is that those endless possibilities were created by breaking the viewer trust in the show's capabilities of making a book accurate adaptation. Some of you are okay with that some of you are not.

Either way, whatever they do will be what Nextflix and the Bridgerton showrunners want, depending on a multitude of factors (timing, money, covid, many script rewrites, money, which executive got dismissed and which got hired in the HR department, did I mention money), factors that, as has been proven time and time again, have nothing to do with the viewer wishes.

So if you're one of those viewers who has seen the stars align and with your wishes and the wishes of the showrunners powers that be, congratulations.... you've hit the jackpot, and all future Bridgerton seasons will be exactly as you want them to be. Oh.. do I hear a smidge of uncertainty from you too, dear viewer who was completely satisfied last season and got everything they wanted?. What do you mean you also don't trust the show to deliver on what they promised in s4? I'm sorry I can't help you, must be some sort of fluke in the matrix.

As for the rest of us, who have gone trough our share of highs and lows, and especially to the Benophie nation, all I can say is to stay strong and hope that good things will happen in the s4 production. We got 2 years, Sophie may not be what we all expect, but we will love her anyway, or at the very least, we will support whoever the show casts as Sophie.

And that's the tea

[hopelesromantc23]

Look, as a viewer, I am charmed by Francesca being bi or gay or queer, and that her (spoilers) future love interest is a woman. I think further lgbtq storylines are superb, and I love that her first romance is exhibited in this earlier season.

However, as someone whose favorite Bridgerton book is, indeed, Francesca’s, I’m mildly disappointed that we won’t have the heartache and pining of Michael having to assume John’s role as the presumptive heir and then Francesca’s decision to get back on the marriage mart be due to her desire to have a child. I just cannot (truly, my imagination must be limited) wrap my head around how they will achieve that storyline.

If you’re going to set a series based on high-society Regency England (and its delightful fantasy of racial cohesion and man-made fabrics with plastic sequins and no bonnets), alright, I can get on board for the fun of it and I’m a sucker for romance and happy endings (see username). But what makes historical romance so attractive (lol) are the societal conventions, the behavioral limitations, and the repressed feelings for the sake of class dynamics and all that goes with it.

Michael Stirling is, arguably, one of the best Bridgerton love interests. He is constant, loyal, and, granted, a charming and sexy reformed rake, BUT he behaves honorably. One of the lovely parts of their love story is his friendship with Francesca. And Michael loves his cousin and best friend, John, and (in never wanting to compromise or hurt John) he loves Francesca from afar from the evening he meets her at F & J’s engagement party. His heartbreak at John’s sudden passing and feelings of emotional impotence in helping Francesca grieve, and his huge reluctance to assume the title Earl of Kilmartin are major facets of the book.

I love that Francesca is queer-coded, I think that’s great, and I love the representation in the show. The only thing that bothers me is that she already had so much going on as a character - which is fine, people are multi-faceted. The showrunners made her neurodivergent (great), they gave her a single-target obsession (piano - love it), they gave her “I’m moving far away and I don’t want a big noisy family” (solid), and not to mention marrying a handsome Black man who is also quiet and thoughtful. All of this to say, of course she can be queer - but how does this serve her story?

I just don’t know how the producers will make Michaela conflicted about inheriting a historically-male role, burden and responsibilities, and having an heir when that was a huge facet of the book and has been a previous plot point in the show. That being said, the showrunners have done other interesting things, have been really thinking ahead, and so let’s see what they do. I look forward to it.

Thank you for coming to my Ted Talk, feel free to let me know what you think!

[darklinaforever]

The thing about romance books that have a lot of different couples explored within a several part series is that not everyone is like certain books. So I don't understand this whole obsession with genderbending love interests? Or even changing so much of it? Even if you like those changes, allow the OG fandom (the book lovers) to mourn for those changes? Sophie fans don't want her to be genderbent. Michael fans don't want him to be genderbent. And yet you will see some Michael fans pointing out that they should genderbend Sophie but not Michael. Some Sophie fans are trying to argue that it is fine for Michael to be genderbent. Then you have people who are making a case for Eloise to end up with a woman (genderbent sir philip or no) but some people who loved her book don't want that. There are many women who are arguing that having another female character who is outspokenly feminist be gay is a stereotype at this point, and many of those fans find it refreshing for her to end up with a man. Although, even those fans agree that they would like to see changes to the Philip + Eloise story. Not to mention, the discussion of possibly genderbending the love interests of Hyacinth and Gregory (which I will be so upset by - especially Lucy). I have already seen people on reddit debate that Lucy should actually be a man. I feel like it doesn't have to make "sense" to genderbend a certain character. If people are attached to a character being a certain way, don't make large changes.

Lastly, I feel like a part of introducing Michaela was for shock value but to also prep the fans the possibility of Sophie being a man. He could've been introduced much later, but I feel like part of the motivation is to gauge the audience's reaction and give people some time to adjust before the new season starts where they feature male!Sophie. Especially since they decided to finally address Benedict's sexuality which I feel was terrible writing. Benedict has barely had any good arcs. They should've explored his sexuality before and made that an arc rather than having it thrown about without any good writing. So, it feels they are pulling the Benedict is bi card NOW because they want audiences to be prepared for the change.

Anyways, I am a lesbian, in case any of the homophobia arguers want to get angry about this rant. I love romance books and my favorite are sapphic books. I just wish shows would stop pulling this shit. It only frustrates people and then divides fandom. It is like these showrunners are too lazy to ever actually be willing to take a risk or start from scratch and build up a fandom. They always want to take advantage of an already large fandom so they can make the changes they think will have people praise their writing and then gaslight the fans when they dislike those changes.

It's so insulting to so many minorities. Are we not good enough for our own stories? Must we always have these hollywood idiots steal other stories and try to force it? Do they have any IDEA how many LGBTQ books are published that would make for 10/10 romances. Sorry for the rant. I am just pissed.

Exactly ! There is so much history to be created about queer people. No need to change the types of characters already existing within a fandom !

And I completely agree with you on Benedict. I said it myself. They poorly explored his pseudo sexual discovery. Not to mention the fact that yes, we really give him little material each season and I don't understand why. Needless to say, I can't wait to finally see him shine in the forefront !

Also, probably even if you specify that you are a lesbian, you will still be accused of homophobia by these morons.

I'm Bi, and I had the right to an anonymous person telling me that I hated queer people.

Bullshit level we are damn high.

[t1gerlilly]

I’ve seen a number of posts dismissing discussions of racism in the new storyline out of hand. To the point where I have no idea what the original criticisms were. And I think that’s really unfortunate. Partly because it feels like there’s a part of our community we’re not listening to and partly because I have some questions on the subject and would really like to hear what people are saying about it, but I’m clearly not following the right people.

I think folks forget how important Eddie is as Hispanic rep. Although 25% of the US population is Hispanic, only 3.3% of lead roles in TV are played by Hispanic actors (source) They’re also only 1.6% of showrunners and 1.9% of directors. And they are also under 5% of executive or management roles in media (source). So there is clearly a systemic problem.

But how does that apply to 911? Well - Carlos on lone star is notorious for having the least screen time of any character, despite the fact that his character is the closest to Athena in terms of role. And Eddie? Well, the latest I could find was season five totals - and Eddie and Chim, the non-white or black men, were bottom of the barrel. To really establish a pattern, you’d want more than two shows, but at least across half a decade of shows, the pattern is pretty consistent. I’m not making an argument about the reasons for that, but those are just the numbers. If I were to speculate, I’d assume it was a combination of who the network exec, showrunner, and executive producer was, since they have the power to make decisions. Just coincidentally, their racial identities mirror the screen time of the characters? Hmmmm

So then let’s look at who does press for the show - making themselves more visible…yeah, that’s largely Oliver. And you can say that’s because he’s a POV character- but you might be surprised to learn that in many seasons either Hen or Athena had more screen time than Buck. Yeah. Really. But you NEVER see Aisha put out to do press the way that Oliver is.

Why is that? Is it because she’s a black woman? Because she plays a queer character? And who is making that decision and why? Because that lack of visibility impacts her personal career. Same thing with Ryan Guzman and Kenneth Choi, who both have less screen time AND less press.

But in particular- and this is the rub - Ryan has CLEARLY been making intentional acting choices FOR YEARS to shape his character and his dynamic with Buck as queer. Oliver played into them, thinking of them as natural chemistry- but it’s clear that other creators on the show - notably the directors and writers, picked up on Ryan’s choices and fan reactions to reframe the dynamics and the characters.

And it’s really clear that Tim originally intended to have Eddie come out, but the poor reaction to Natalia and the fact that the actress was unavailable led him to switch the storyline to Buck. All of which is perfectly understandable.

But if there’s one person most responsible for the reason we ultimately got bi!Buck, it’s Ryan Guzman - for the bravery and perseverance of his choices as an artist. It’s amazing to me that in all the praise for Oliver saying that he “would have” leaned into Buck as queer even without the go ahead…no one has thought to praise the actor who actually DID THAT - for YEARS- when he was in a much more precarious position as a character and an actor. Like really take a minute to look at what that took…he was risking his livelihood with that choice.

And then, when the show DOES finally make it canon…who gets the praise? The buzz? The support? The white guy who was mostly oblivious for the past five years. Like…how is THAT fair?

And OK, the original plan was for the helicopter pilot to be Lucy, and that fell through so they reached out to Lou, because Tommy was a former character- but also quite likely because he looks a good deal like Buck - and the SL was supposed to have that character be a stand-in for the other half of Buddie. When they switched to Buck, they had to make Tommy have similar hobbies to Eddie to establish the similarities, since they couldn’t rely on looks.

But that meant they totally whitewashed the story line. And if you want to talk about firsts - when has a Hispanic lead come out as gay or bi? And how many of them were men? And how many were over 21? And on a mainstream show?

And no, it wasn’t intentional (just a function of having so many more white characters than Hispanic characters), but it was unfortunate. Not to mention the intersectionality of it all.

So…I honestly think there’s a decent basis for critique there. Not a “these people are terrible” critique, but a “not paying attention to diversity systemically” in a way that lets unconscious bias have the same impact as deliberate bias.

And I really wonder at the people who just dismissed the entire discussion - how hard did you listen? How willing were you to hear what people were saying? Because this is an issue that has to do with real people, their careers, their hopes, dreams, and identities. And you should be willing to listen.

[the-other-art-blog]

What do you think about the theories going around that they might announce Benedict to be bi by the end of this season? His character has always had queer undertones and the show runners have talked about making more stories with lgbtq inclusivity. As much as I love Sophie, I really don’t think they’re going to include a female lead next season

My short answer is: I've heard the rumors and even if they announce Ben as bi, he's still marrying Sophie. They already skipped Ben season, they're not going to change his story completely.

My long (really long) answer is:

I truly believe that Benedict wasn't supposed to be anything but straight. People saw him hanging out with ONE gay man, who was very much in love with another gay man, and decided he must be gay or bi too. It didn't matter that he went right to a threesome with 2 women. That storyline was merely to show Benedict how difficult life could be for some people and to stop being so judgmental and hypocritical. In the end, it was about SOPHIE BECKETT.

Bton team must have decided to keep Benedict's future open so as not to cause problems with the side of the fandom and press who would call them for supposedly queerbaiting. They consciously decided to pair him up with a woman in s2 and his poem was about a woman (another foreshadowing for SOPHIE BECKETT).

With Jess as the new showrunner, I think she decided to address Ben's sexuality and open a door for bisexuality to appease some people.

Let me just say that a lot of Benophies including me have embraced the idea of bisexual Ben, you just have to read fanfiction to see that. I am just concerned that certain people will be nasty to Sophie because they want Ben to marry a man.

I also don't think that a show whose main audience is women would erase a female lead. That would just be absolutely stupid.

They might experiment with secondary characters, but not the leads.

I'M TALKING POSSIBLE SPOILERS NOW!!!!!

I have heard about a threesome between Tilley, Benedict, and a man name Paul Suarez(?) We saw him in the trailer.

I've heard various versions. It seems Lady Tilley arranges the meeting, but I'm unsure if Ben agrees. Some people say he declines the offer. So, even if he is attracted to men, which he has never indicated in any shape or form, she is not ready to go physical. This is fine, bisexuality doesn't mean you MUST sleep with both sexes.

And honestly, if he does it, I wouldn't blame him. That man is gorgeous.

But again, it's pretty obvious that this is just to appease people. But really they are setting everything up for Benophie. There have been direct references to events from that book:

Violet moving out of Bridgerton house

Benedict losing his art

Benedict being an asshole to debutantes

All the mentions of Benedict excellent dancing skills

She's coming. SOPHIE BECKETT is coming.

Even more, they won't change canon couples because this is a business decision. The books are being republished with a tv tie-in cover. Let's say that Ben gets a male love interest, how would they do that cover? Are they going to bring a random woman to pose for him? It's the same for the other books, and some of them are too specific in the titles. Philip is going to be Eloise's husband in the show because the book is called To SIR PHILIP with Love, same for When HE Was Wicked, and It's in HIS Kiss.

[girl4music]

"So if the Willow/Tara relationship is so fondly recalled a generation after Buffy ended, why is the same not true for Xena and Gabrielle's relationship? There are several points of difference between the two series that make plain precisely why Xena was never able to be as explicit with its queer content as Buffy. Most obviously Xena began a year and a half earlier and only briefly were the two shows thriving conterminously. Xena was already half way through its penultimate 5th season when Tara was first introduced on Buffy and by the time the Willow/Tara relationship was in full bloom, Xena was heading towards its final episode. Even more importantly, Xena was a syndicated series with its producer Rob Tapert of Renaissance Pictures hawking the product to local and national networks whilst remaining reliant upon advertisers and a handful of key sponsers.

When considering the queerness of the Xena/Gabrielle relationship then, what ought to be emphasised is intentionality. As a syndicated series in the mid-to-late 1990's Xena was in no position to include openly queer characters on its show. What made the series groundbreaking and positive for the LGBTQIA+ community was that when Xena's showrunners, staff writers and stars discovered early in Season 1 that they had a legion of queer fans, rather than being repulsed they actively embraced their unexpected fanbase. Skirting the expectations of networks and advertisers in much the same manner that Buffy a few years later would use magic as an allegory for lesbianism. It's also worth emphasising, as one further point of departure between the two shows, that the Willow/Tara relationship was carefully planned out in advance by Joss Whedon whereas when Xena first aired in September 1995 nothing of the sort was even remotely contemplated. A taste of the conservatism showrunner Rob Tapert and his writers were forced to deal with maybe gleaned from the fact firstly that Tapert was strongly advised when pitching the series simply to make Xena male, and secondly that when the first episode was released censors and local advertisers voiced concerns over the opening credits sequence since it featured Xena getting intimate with the shirtless warlord Draco and it was feared that his long braided hair might lead audiences to conclude that Xena was in bed with a woman. Yet despite the fact that Xena's early episodes were never intended to be anything but straight, they inadvertently came off as incredibly queer. Right from the outset Gabrielle is heavily coded as a baby gay. Feeling utterly trapped by her dull peasant existence, Gabrielle yearns for excitement and adventure and longs to see the world. Yet the way she expresses this to Xena entirely gives off the vibe of 'only gay in the village' staring down the barrel of a heteronormative life she doesn't want. In scene after scene across the show's first few episodes the Xena/Gabrielle dynamic enjoys a decidedly romantic undertone even as their writers felt compelled to push boyfriends of the week upon both characters.

All of this came to a head in episode eight in an inadvertently deeply romantic scene as Gabrielle tearfully farewells Xena right before she departs on what appears to be a suicide mission. Actors Lucy Lawless and Renee O'Connor have always claimed that it was around this point in the show's run that they first became aware of their lesbian fanbase as they rapidly found themselves inundated with fan mail from queer women of all ages at the same time as an abundance of Xena/Gabrielle femslash began appearing online in the early days of the internet. To their lasting credit both stars, alongside producer Rob Tapert, enthusiastically jumped at the chance to please their new and unexpected demographic. As we shall see in the final section, they sometimes miss the mark, but on the whole they proved remarkably successful in respecting their queer fanbase whilst maintaining plausible deniability with the censors, networks and advertisers whom they needed to appease in order to sell the series. What resulted was a noticeable shift in the tone of the Xena/Gabrielle relationship across the back half of Season 1. Despite intermittently continuing to thrust boyfriends of the week upon both characters the show's inner-core of staff writers took note of the warmth, affection and intimacy that had originally won over their queer viewership and began integrating these types of scenes into their stories with increasing frequency. Just as importantly the intimacy Xena and Gabrielle began displaying towards one another did not exist in a vacuum as little droplets for the benefit of queer viewers but was instead used as a genuine form of character building to reinforce the show's central message that neither protagonist could contemplate life without the other. When, for example, Xena is struck by a poisoned dart and Gabrielle thinks she's dead, she kisses her a fond farewell, has a furious grief-stricken breakdown over her death and then risks her own life to prevent Xena's body from being torn limb from limb, and, in even more iconic fashion, when the tables are turned in the season finale and a wounded Gabrielle seemingly dies in Xena's arms we get an incredibly powerful acting moment from Lucy Lawless as Xena's stoic warrior facade entirely crumbles upon the realisation that she might have lost Gabrielle.

Thereafter, Xena's writers became evermore emboldened in making the Xena/Gabrielle relationship the centrepiece of the story. Growing the implied love and affection between their heroines to the point that by mid-season 2 in the episode 'The Quest', Xena and Gabrielle at last share their first on screen kiss. This episode, it should be noted, aired in February 1997, almost exactly four years to the day before Willow and Tara's first kiss on Buffy, and yes, the kiss took place with Xena inhabiting the body of Autolycus the thief, played by Bruce Campbell, but we nonetheless get to see Xena and Gabrielle in the spirit world leaning in to lock lips immediately preceding a hard cut to Gabrielle and Autolycus, leaving the viewer in absolutely no doubt as to what was actually going on. In essence the Xena/Gabrielle relationship was no longer subtext. Xena had unequivocally kissed Gabrielle romantically, albeit to appease networks and financial backers in the body of a man, and as the series progressed other similar excuses were concocted to enable the pair to express their physical intimacy whilst maintaining the necessary plausible deniability. 'The Quest' proved a line in the sand moment for Xena and Gabrielle's relationship. Only two episodes later in the light-hearted 'A Day In The Life' their behaviour makes plain that they're now unquestionably dating and are very much in the honeymoon phase. They can't keep their hands off each other, they bicker like an old married couple, they enjoy decidedly un-platonic baths together and they even repeatedly bemoan the fact that men keep crushing on Xena. From here-on-in the series makes no bones about the fact, but one giant rift and a few ill-conceived boyfriends of the week aside, Xena and Gabrielle are in a canonical romantic relationship throughout the rest of the show's run. Indeed within the limits of the conservative censorship guidelines they were forced to work with, Xena's writers went out of their way to highlight the physical and emotional intimacy of their leads' relationships with each other, and with other women, in a manner that really cannot be read as wholly platonic unless you're the kind of person who has a 'see-no-homo' mentality. This was done, it should be emphasised, not to queer-bait, nor to keep the heterosexual male viewer engaged, but rather to queer-code for the benefit of the show's substantial lesbian audience who were the driving force behind the packed Xena cons that became enormously popular during and in the years immediately following the show's run. It's abundantly clear moreover that cast and crew alike were entirely onboard with what was going on between its leads."

This is a very well-worded, clear and concise analysis on the intentional queer-coding in the TV shows ‘Xena: Warrior Princess' and 'Buffy the Vampire Slayer'. If you get chance to watch the entire video, it's well worth it.

It's very true that Willow and Tara's relationship is much more acknowledged and praised for being 'explicitly canon' WLW/queer representation than Xena and Gabrielle's relationship is but - as the YouTuber said - that's because most people don't take in the historical context behind how and why Xena and Gabrielle couldn't be explicitly canon and if not for what the Xena creator's did with the Xena/Gabrielle relationship, it's likely Willow and Tara never could have been either since Xena preceded it and faced a lot more challenges of which gave it the victory necessary for Buffy to follow and continue to break down the barriers of censorship.

Xena and Gabrielle never ever get on those "the most groundbreaking LGBTQIA+ ships or couples in TV art/entertainment of all-time" lists simply because it wasn’t confirmed as a canon one in the show itself - which is incredibly sad and frustrating for me - but regardless - it is true that they still broke the most ground in getting WLW representation (or any queer representation) to even be allowed to be seen in a major TV show format.

I say it all the time: Xena and Gabrielle were really the greenlight and blueprint to every bit of positive queer representation we have today and I just want people to be aware that their queer ships probably would not exist if not for them and the insanely brave and fearless creators/cast/crew that did many things first before any others did and they should at least be honoured for that if not for anything else because we had virtually fucking nothing at all until they came along and changed the TV landscape forevermore until explicitly canon queer content could be permissible in TV media.

I don't like it when queer people ignore Xena and Gabrielle's legacy in the LGBTQIA+ community because if it wasn't for them and the amazing people behind creating them,... where would we even be now? We would not be as far as we are. I can guarantee you that. We wouldn’t be in a position where showrunners and networks can queer-bait the hell out of their straight (but still intentionally queer-coded for the purpose of exploitation) characters. We most certainly would not be in the position to see genuine and sincere positive WLW/queer representation. There would be no Willow and Tara. There would be no Waverly and Nicole. There would be no EXPLICITLY CANON WLW/queer couples.

You guys do not know how good you've got it. I never had any of this when I was a queer child. All I had was Xena and Gabrielle. That's it! It’s all that I held on to. And to this day I still hold on to Xena and Gabrielle with an iron grip because I am still convinced that they are the best WLW/queer representation in all of TV history simply because they didn’t have to be but were anyway because the creators/cast/crew felt it was much more valuable as a WLW love story than completely platonic and when you watch the show for yourself, you do see that this is the truth. It is a lot more valuable that way.

Everything works much better. The storytelling, the arcs, the characterization, the tonal quality. All of it. The dialogue is snappier, funnier, more campy, more vibrant with the queer narratives involved. It feels right. But as soon as you switch it over to a straight narrative or a more heteronormative outlook, that quickly vanishes. Some of the worst episodes of the show are the ones where they try to force-feed you straight relationships - knowing that there’s already an extremely strong and substantial one established between the two leads and you ask yourself - other than blatant homophobia - why they can’t be that central romance of the entire show.

But don’t worry because as far as the creators/cast/crew are concerned - they are. They don’t want those straight relationships or boyfriends of the week either. They don’t so much mind the various other WLW/queer relationships or girlfriends of the week, but even then, they’re still pretty adamant that it’s X&G that they ship.

When you’ve got that - that sincere intention - it really doesn’t matter what’s explicitly canon and what’s not. If the creators/cast/crew are completely onboard, it really makes absolutely no difference whatsoever if they are or aren’t because as far as anyone that matters sees it - they already are and that already drives the heart of it. Then you look at ‘Supergirl’ or ‘ONCE’ or ‘Rizzoli and Isles’ and you think - if only they were that damn brave. If only they took risks. If only they met the challenges. But no, they went the other way on all of that even when they didn’t need to because censorship was a lot less severe. That’s why I have no love or respect for them. And I’m not asking for too much because Xena and Buffy did it and they’re regarded so highly in fandom. Not with everything but definitely for real and true WLW/queer representation and I think that maybe we need to acknowledge it more because what we have today is good representation but not good storytelling and the only way someone like me will pay attention is if there’s both and they’re cleverly intertwined together.

[theladyragnell]

I recently was talking to a bridgerton fan and i was saying how eloise MUST be a a lesbian...any male relationship would just seem forced and they said the showrunner had already said in s1 that eloise would not be a lesbian😭 dont know if that still stands but i do wonder if she'll end up with the printer guy in a sort of little women- jo & bhaer- workaround to lesbianism way

Yeah, I might have seen something about that too, but either they've changed their minds or we're just going full Merlin/Teen Wolf with it, because nothing about Eloise is reading as straight right now.

I don't envy the showrunners, to be clear, adaptations are a thankless task and loose ones even more so, because then you start running into the question of HOW loose you should get. Since Bridgerton seems to be opting for the "extremely loose" end of the spectrum, I think one of the smartest things they could do is to have a season where the focus is on a queer love story. Eloise and Benedict are both good options for that, and I'm hoping they've realized since season one that it's worth exploring.

But, y'know, the past year and more has been an object lesson in how shitty corporate Hollywood is, so I'm not getting my hopes up. I'm just baffled about what they're doing if they're NOT doing a romance.

(Mildly concerned this is going to be a "Cressida is gay and pining for her straight friend" thing, where as some tertiary plot in a season not yet promised she would meet some woman and that would be that. Not that it's not a valid plot, it just seems like kind of a waste of a setup.)

[scoops404]

hi scoopsogie, the post you rebloged about media creators expecting their audience to be different than it actually is and then putting their rage onto said media, made me think about Dream. because so far he was a creator who actually embraced the big part of his audience that is women and queer people. and he always has been supportive. but. and please correct me or reassure me if I'm being unreasonable. when he said in the video that a big part of his fans are actually collage guys and people into competitive gaming and with his request to be normal and tone down the activities that mostly women and queer people do in the fandom, i got scared that twitter's behaviour made him a bit apprehensive towards this side of fandom. that he doesn't like us like he used to and maybe he wishes his fan were mostly gamer guys...

Hi friend!

I like that post, it's very informative and sheds light on an issue in main stream media. For television shows, like they're mostly talking about here, there are a number of people behind the scenes making decisions and leading where the next season or arc is going. The showrunner, the network, individual writers (very rarely the actors). In between seasons, these people have time to discover *who* is watching their shows and being the loudest about it, engaging with it. It's not that NO men are watching those shows, they just aren't as loud and interested and locked in. I've read theories before about why men aren't as engaged in shows like woman as far as transformative work goes (art, fic) and a big one that I put my horse behind is that these shows are made *for* men. They see themselves as the heroes, the characters, and so they don't need to turn to fanfic to "fix" anything or to imagine it differently. I dunno, that's another essay for a different time.

For Dream and other streamers/real people fandoms (even musicians to a degree) they see their fandoms in real time. Musicians, definitely, because when they're touring you visibly see the audience coming to the show. For streamers it's a tad different, because names in chat are just names, but creators are usually way more involved in twitter where they see the bios and stuff.

I think Dream meant that his fanbase (which our reputation online has been we are all 14 year old girls) - *does* have college age people+ in it and men (who, let's be real, with *our* reputation online, is it any wonder they aren't as vocal as the die hard fans?). When your youtube subscribers alone are 30 million, you wouldn't expect all 30 million to be 14 year olds. I think Dream is very aware that his audience in primary female leaning queer people and POC. Especially compared to other gaming creators and a big part of why we are all here is because he makes us comfortable following him. I don't care how good a youtuber someone is, if they're shitty to their female and queer fans and constantly making gay jokes, I'd bounce. A huge part of why I even got into this fandom was the fanfiction. I had never played minecraft before in my life.

But also remember just who this video is intended for. It's not really for us. It's not intended for the fans who already saw the holes in these allegations and chose to believe Dream. It's for people looking to crucify him. It's *those people* he is showing himself to. It's *those people* he is saying 'I have boundaries and I don't condone everything my fanbase does willy nilly.' This shouldn't be a surprise to us, as Dream has always said he doesn't support doxxing and he doesn't support using his name to harass anyone. He's gone out of his way to be an example and be kind to people who have been mean and cruel to him (tommy, quackity). We've seen him reach out privately and resolve issues before (that guy Henry or whoever ((he's irrelevant imo)) who said Dream provided alcohol to an 18 year old in his hotel room which turned out not to be true).

I don't think he suddenly hates art or fanfiction. This is the man who not only has written fanfiction before (Percy Jackson) but hosted a fanfiction writing contest for his own fandom. I think what he doesn't want is for antis or whoever to go into the #dreamfanart tag and see explicit fic of him naked and/or having sex. Because minors CAN see that in the tag, it reaches a wider audience. Randos who only see that tag will think he condones that. So, he's simply stating he doesn't want that where majority of people will see it. At least, that's my interpretation.

It really sucks, but I think that really means no explicit art on twitter at all (though i think there's a gray area of having a private acct and only sharing with people who are over 18 and have to request to follow -- but that's been a practice already). Additionally, I'm not sure where his line is and where it crosses into explicit. Is kissing okay? He put a hard case out there for not truthing, which I'm glad he said, people shouldn't be scrutinizing his close friendships to the point where they're trying to see if they have separate hotel rooms (this is an example, i actually haven't heard of people doing that). Don't make DNF being real your entire personality.

I really don't think he suddenly wants an entirely gamer-boy audience. I think courting that side of his fandom helps with the harassment overall, though. Having men in the fandom gives the entire fandom more validity -> which, this actually makes me really angry and I hate it but (circling back to the post you mentioned) people have always struggled to respect majority female and queer fandoms.

I'm definitely rambling and trying to make sure I'm answering all the parts of your ask. This is not coherent and not all of my thoughts at all but it's already disgustingly long. So,

TLDR: Dream still loves us, still likes art and fanfiction, and isn't trying to replace us with dude bros.