sapphywatchesyousleep:

crazyintheeast:

counterpunches:

lafgl:

padmedala:

i’d be really curious to know what percent of queerbaiting is 

a) an intentional marketing scheme to stir interest in the project and attract certain fanbases (lgbtq people and young women) vs. 

b) members of the creative team genuinely wanting to write queer characters but the corporate side of things force them to tone it down but they still leave little hints vs. 

c) they legitimately did not know how gay something would come across

The answer:

A is 100%. Because B and C are not queerbaiting. The literal meaning and definition of it is A.

#a) queerbaiting #b) queer coding #c) subtext

Please tumblr learn the difference and stop shitting on good shows

Anyone who’s still not clear:

Teen Wolf show-makers asking fans what they wanted, getting the answer ‘canon-queer relationships’ and then just hinting at Stiles being bi and having the characters people ship hang out platonically is queer-baiting

Gravity Falls having the two male police officers hold hands and show genuine affection to one another, but not being allowed to confirm they were married because the studio wanted to sell the show to Russia and China is queer-coding

Arthur Conan Doyle genuinely not understanding why some people would think two men living together, declaring their undying affection for one another, and constantly referring to Holmes as a ‘confirmed bachelor’ was a bit gay is queer-subtext

Clear now?

animatedamerican:

dog-of-ulthar:

the question of whether modern internet humor is dadaist is fascinating because sure on a surface level, it absolutely resembles dadaist art of the 1920′s but my question is…………..is it art?

the original dada movement emerged specifically to interact with that question, of whether an incoherent collage, or a gold-plated toilet seat, or poetry pulled out of a hat should be considered art

but internet humor?  it exists solely for us to entertain one another.  it doesn’t give a shit about what art is or isn’t, and comments like “this belongs in a museum” or “where’s her oscar” always come after the fact, and, more importantly, are made specifically to add entertainment value

so my take for today is that internet humor isn’t neo-dada, or post-dada, or even “e-dada” or “#dada”; as a mass movement concerned more with community participation than performance to an audience and wholly unconcerned with questions about higher meaning…………….this is folk dada

FOLK DADA