This might be controversial, but I don't see Byler as queerbait, but more so just a very drawn out and poorly-handled plot. Please keep in mind that I'm trying to approach this in a nuanced way. I'm not saying that the writers/Duffers did nothing wrong at all. I'm more so trying to narrow down what the actual issues are so that we can be more targeted and specific in our critiques. While there is plenty to criticise, I believe the main issue is a combination of shoddy writing, the side-lining of Will, and the exploitative nature of the story, more so than the Byler plot being a thought-out marketing scheme -- issues which were exacerbated by a fandom that did not allow much space for criticism.
By definition, queerbaiting refers to "a marketing technique for fiction and entertainment in which creators hint at, but do not depict, same-sex romance or other LGBTQ+ representation."
The key word here is marketing, which I'll get into later. First however, we should be aware that Will being textually gay and this factoring hugely into his arc automatically calls into question whether this is truly queerbaiting by definition. Examples like Johnlock and Sterek never even had that. Depicting an unrequited plot is not that same as coyly hinting a same-sex romance and never following through. Right off the bat, Will still fills that "depiction of LGBTQ+ representation" part (bare minimum, I guess, but I'm just breaking it all down to the bare bones here). The quality of this representation is brought into question, but on its own I don't know if it can be called "textbook queerbait" just because it ended up being an unrequited plot rather than the epic romance people had hoped for.
Before I get into the marketing side of things, let's look at the execution of Byler within the show:
I think there are certain things written into the narrative that, in better hands, would indicate that Will would receive reciprocal love. In an ideal world, there would be another character built up to be this love interest, but as there isn't, I can understand why fans wanted it to be Mike. Things like the "the snowballs became an avalanche" line feel like set-up that wasn't delivered on, as it feels underwhelming for this line to simply be about the lack of signals and avalanches with Mike. I personally think it would have been very easy to do Will's self-acceptance plot while having a love interest (not necessarily Mike) whom he ends up with at the end of the season as a narrative “reward” for his self-actualisation. But the writers chose a lazier route.
Some of the symbolism and gags (like the pipe scene and "I like dick!") are also questionable, but can also come down to the writers using certain tropes and imagery to demonstrate Will's feelings for Mike. Given the lacklustre resolution, it comes across as being in poor taste, but that makes it shoddy writing more so than queerbait. Same with the use of Will's pain and love to counsel Mike and fix Mileven's relationship throughout season 4. "Why would they put him through so much just to never let him receive the same love? That would be cruel." It's a valid question and an unsatisfying writing choice, and the truth is that it is cruel, especially as scenes like the Jonathan/Will one at Surfer Boy Pizza, and the tower scene in the finale were originally not in the script.
The writers neglect to explore Will's interiority and life with proper depth for two seasons, before using his feelings to uplift his straight friends, and then minimising said feelings when they are no longer convenient for the plot -- all the while never giving him a reciprocated love story of his own despite his desire for one. <- That is the ultimate narrative they chose to go with. That is the issue here. As per the definition, I don't think that an unrequited plot makes it queerbait necessarily. I do, however, think that it's exploitative and underwhelming writing that should be criticised.
I would even take it further and say that there were many warning signs already present in earlier seasons that fans pointedly ignored, such as the show's unwillingness to properly explore the impact of racism on Lucas, or classism on Jonathan and Nancy's relationship in season 3, or even the Duffers' failure to stand up for their actors (like Caleb, Noah, and Jake) outside of the show. Once more, I'm not excusing the Duffers' actions and shallow writing, but it's vital that everyone reflects on how the fandom environment also contributed to the outrage we're now seeing.
Now onto the marketing side of things.
As per the above definition, queerbaiting is primarily a marketing tactic. I would agree more that the show was queerbaiting if there was an overwhelming amount of official marketing for season 5 that paired Mike and Will together, presented them as a "couple," teased a reciprocal relationship in interviews, and advertised their arcs differently to what they did. This truly isn't what happened.
Instead, the marketing for this season actually caused a lot of "byler doubt," and people claimed that this was just Netflix "protecting the plot twist," and to pay attention to the show instead. The sub-fandom believed in byler despite the marketing, not because of it, and there was the serious issue of fans getting attacked and ostracised for spreading doubt or being more realistic about the course of the story and failings of the writers, which prevented alternative viewpoints from being considered.
And yes, I have seen the "byler wasn't queerbait mfs when I pull up the receipts" posts. I don't view memes to be on the same level as actual promotional material for upcoming seasons (like interviews and trailers), especially when many of these (like the "real third wheel" and "battleship" one) were posted pre-s4, before even one-sided Byler was confirmed. Many of those memes were not posted by the official ST accounts, just the Netflix ones (and not even the main one at that) -- which also promoted Mileven, along with a whole range of non-canon ships like Steddie and Ronance. I don't think anyone suddenly went "you guys are right, Byler is happening" because of these memes. Do I think they are, in hindsight, kind of tasteless given how Will's feelings are handled in the narrative? Yes. But a targeted marketing campaign? Especially for season 5? No.
When we break down the way in which Will, Mike, and El's individual and intertwining storylines were promoted on the main ST accounts and in the press tour interviews and trailers, these were the key points we saw reiterated:
Will's coming-of-age and recentering in the supernatural plot, teasing his history with Vecna and the Upside Down
Will's feelings for Mike being referred to as "unrequited," along with an absence of Byler scenes in the trailers and Finn and Noah not doing any interviews as a pair
Trouble in paradise for Mileven, with the "This isn't like one of your campaigns. You don't get to write the ending" line
Bonus: remember how much they pushed the Mileven rooftop scene too, from a suspiciously long portion of it that could be lip-read being leaked in 2024, to a whole range of posts about it
Execution and writing quality aside, all of these things did end up coming to fruition in season 5. The marketing was not misleading. Despite these warning signs, however, the fandom still argued that the production team was simply trying to hide the plot twist.
I don't want this to get too long, but this is the basis of why I don't view the story as queerbaiting from a marketing standpoint, as it lacks the targeted approach typical of queerbaits like Sterek (where the show posted promo vids of the actors cuddling and lying on top of each other), and the actual marketing ended up being true to the story that was ultimately realised. You can debate the effectiveness and validity of this story, but that doesn’t mean that the marketing intentionally was trying to sway you.
And before anyone is tempted to reply to this with "you're just defending the Duffers," let me once again say that I am not. I simply believe that we need to be targeted and specific about what our critiques actually are. By recognising the problem for what it is -- lazy and exploitative writing -- the true depth to their biases and shallow progressiveness is revealed, paving the way for clearer and more effective criticism. And, while some might not want to hear this, we can also self-reflect on the hostile environment the fandom created, which held the creators on a pedestal for far too long and ostracised those who dared to disagree.
theartofmadeline
blakekathryn
pixelskylines
kianamaiart
dailybridgerton
yousharknotpass
snowghoul
