The private life of celebrities is non-existent. Fans and haters alike have grown to feel entitled to every aspect of their public figure of choice. Especially with the rise of social media, the line between personal and shared knowledge has become blurred. Celebrities themselves have had a split approach to dealing with such invasion.
Beyoncé, for example, has elected to shy away from the limelight altogether, known for her aversion to interviews. Others, however, such as the Kardashian family, have embraced such private insight, inviting viewers in to see it all. Regardless of a celebrity’s approach to fame, there are certain things celebrities keep to themselves. But at what point does withholding personal information turn into a case of deception?
These questions come to the forefront when discussing the idea of queerbaiting. Whilst speculation into a celebrity’s sexuality is not new, the added discourse of queerbaiting is.
According to Dictionary.com, queerbaiting is the implication of non-heterosexual relationships as a means to engage or attract an LGBTQ+ audience without explicit LGBTQ+ representation. Though the definition implies queerbaiting as a device used more often in fictional mediums, recently fan spaces have used the term to characterize celebrities.
Harry Styles is a popular British musician who became well known for his allyship to the LGBTQ+ community. This was emphasized following the December 2020 Vogue issue, which featured him as the first man to appear alone on a Vogue cover. For the cover photo, Styles wore a dress. As a cisgender man, this fashion choice was an intentional attempt to break gender norms and subvert expectations of masculinity.
For night one of Harryween, Style’s two-night Halloween 2021 concert special held at Madison Square Garden, Styles dressed as Dorothy from the classic film “The Wizard of Oz.”During the concert, he encouraged fans to take the night as an opportunity to be the truest versions of themselves; the version they may not be able to adorn daily.
For years, fans have begun to speculate over his sexuality. Beyond the aforementioned subversion of gender norms, Styles has chosen to perform an unreleased song entitled “Medicine” during numerous concerts. Medicine features the lyrics “The boys and the girls are here, I mess around with him. And I’m okay with it.”
Despite these hints at a queer identity, the singer has never publicly stated his sexuality. Because of this, allegations of exploiting the LGTBQ+ community have arisen. Fans have questioned Style’s motives in keeping his sexuality ambiguous. Is he utilizing bisexual aesthetics to attract attention and seem edgier, or is genuinely expressing himself?
Back in 2019, Styles was quoted in an interview with The Guardian responding to queerbaiting concerns. “Am I sprinkling in nuggets of sexual ambiguity to try and be more interesting? No… I want things to look a certain way. Not because it makes me look gay, or it makes me look straight, or it makes me look bisexual, but because I think it looks cool … I just think sexuality’s something that’s fun. Honestly? I can’t say I’ve given it any more thought than that.”
A notable example of queerbaiting recently brought into the national stage centered around Billie Eilish, who faced backlash following the release of her single and music video “Lost Cause.” Like Styles, Eilish’s sexuality has been the topic of discussions and her music video, featuring several girls dancing together, was perceived by fans as an exploitation of women loving women relationships. Eilish also added to the controversy by posting behind-the-scenes photos from the music video on Instagram with the caption ‘I love girls.’
Here is when the question of queerbaiting versus privacy begins. The choice not to publicly disclose one’s sexuality is considered valid until celebrities are brought into the conversation.
Most people who are supportive of the LGBTQ+ community are incredibly understanding of an individual’s inability to publicly identify, whether it be for safety concerns or just wanting to wait till the moment is right. But the public’s inability to conceive celebrities as real people twists this thinking. Even people who support that ideology for the ‘average joe’ are quick to turn against public figures for doing the same.
We must keep the same energy toward celebrities that we would toward a stranger on the street by respecting their right to express and talk about their sexuality as they like. I purposefully say stranger rather than a friend because you shouldn’t have to be close with someone to respect their right to privacy.
The author of the popular gay love story “Love, Simon” was forced to come out as bisexual after being accused of exploitation. While society should hold those responsible for exploiting LGBTQ+ communities accountable, it’s essential we not mistake a lack of information for a willing lie or deceit.
Despite visible progress in terms of equal marriage and more representation of LGBTQ+ narratives and identities, homophobic and transphobic violence is still a real threat. Countless LGBTQ+ people have faced violent, and sometimes fatal, repercussions after being outed.
Celebrities do not owe the public an explanation of how they identify. Especially in the case of Styles, this treatment discourages allyship and promotes the idea one can’t care about a community they aren’t directly associated with. So often, snap judgment from the public harms celebrity reputations, and while the act of canceling is fair when used correctly, the possibility of damaging one’s livelihood off a hunch is dangerous.
Though it may be hard to imagine, the celebrities you look up to are the same as you, obviously richer and possibly hotter, but at the core, people. People have emotions, and those emotions are valid regardless of status. The sexuality of Harry Styles, or anybody for that matter, is not something that is owed to the public. Regardless of how one identifies the product of your activism isn’t wholeheartedly dependent on your willingness to display private detail to the world.
