careful intentional queercoding and subtext is literally SO sexy but these days people act like the only reasons a writer might choose subtext over overtly stating queerness in the text are either obliviousness (straight people creating accidental homoeroticism), malicious intent ("queerbaiting"), or externally-imposed restriction (the publisher/network/"chinese and russian markets" wouldn't approve) but have you considered that sometimes… things that are purely subtextual… are better. better and sexier and more powerful.
because intentional queercoding in the subtext of a story turns it into an active conversation. instead of a singular narrative that must be universally legible and palatable in order to be presented and consumed in a way that maintains a clear distinction between author and audience, where the Word of God creates a singular Canon that we the people must accept and adhere to, subtextual queercoding requires the audience to pay careful attention and to actively participate in the synthesis of the true full meaning of the story, tapping into a simultaneously private and communal shared knowledge and language and experience. it demands something from the audience, demands care and attention and a sharing of a part of themselves, and in return transforms what could otherwise be a process of passive consumption into a mutual and reciprocal act of co-creation