Here's How Coding Movie Villains as Queer Is Hurting Our Community

968 Shares

Do you know about queer coding? You’ve probably come across it on TV and in movies, even if you didn’t know the term for it.

Queer coding is when writers hint that a character is queer without explicitly saying so – and it’s usually villains who are written this way.

So why is queer coding something you should be worried about? Here’s Riley J. Dennis with an answer to that and more questions about how this media trope is hurting real people. It’s not just about the movies, and this is why need to pay attention to the impact.

With Love,
The Editors at Everyday Feminism

Click for the Transcript

Hey humans! So, today we’re gonna take a look at a something called “queercoding.”

Justin on a Computer: What do you have against queercoding? What, you don’t want queer people learning computer science?

What? No? That’s not what I’m talking about at all. I’m talking—

Justin on a Computer: Because I’m queer, and I code just fine! It’s not like my code is queer.

Yeah, no, I get that. I told you I don’t have a problem with—

Justin on a Computer: Except this one time, I did write a program that turned someone’s computer gay.

Computers have a sexual orientation?

Justin on a Computer: I mean, they do if you actually know how to code.

Uh, okay. So anyways, coding – when we’re talking about media – is when writers heavily imply that a character has a specific trait without explicitly saying that they have that trait. Queercoding then, is when writers, intentionally or not, hint that a character is queer, which usually means gay, but is also an umbrella term for other marginalized identities, particularly based on gender or sexuality.

Justin on a Computer: Oh, I get it now. But it isn’t that a good thing? Doesn’t that mean we get more queer representation in the media?

Not exactly. Queercoding is harmful in a few ways, but the biggest one is that it’s usually villains who are strongly queercoded.

Disney villains are often the clearest example of this. Hades from Hercules has “feminine” mannerisms and is seen drinking a “girly” drink. Jafar from Aladdin has “feminine” mannerisms, a “feminine” speech pattern, and looks to be wearing eye makeup. Scar from The Lion King, Governor Ratcliffe from Pocahontas, and Captain Hook from Peter Pan are usually seen as queercoded as well for similar reasons. Ursula from The Little Mermaid is even modeled after a drag performer named Divine.

But this goes beyond Disney. The most obvious example I can think of is Him from The Powerpuff Girls who wears a pink tutu, is fanned by nearly naked men in one episode, and regularly switches between a high-pitched, “feminine” voice and a deeper, “masculine” voice.

Justin on a Computer: I don’t get why that’s bad. I loved all those villains.

Yeah, I think a lot of queer people feel a connection to these villains because they can relate to them to some degree. And I’m not saying that’s a bad thing. But the obvious queercoding of villains and the lack of queer protagonists makes it really easy for people to associate queerness with being evil. If the only time you ever see a feminine man is when he’s evil, I don’t think you’re going to have very positive associations towards feminine men.

This can easily influence the young people who see these TV and movies. Queer youth can begin to see themselves as Other – as something that’s not normal and something that’s to be defeated. Non-queer youth, likewise, find it easier to demonize queer people because that’s already the association they have with queerness.

Justin on a Computer: Yeah, but the stuff you mentioned – like feminine mannerisms and speech pattern – that doesn’t make someone queer. You’re only making that connection because it’s a stereotype.

You know, I agree. I don’t think people are defined by their mannerisms or their speech patterns. I think there can be feminine straight men and masculine gay men and all sorts of different gender expressions that are totally valid. But that doesn’t erase the fact that most people will read these characters – or at least these characteristics – as potentially queer.

The unfortunate reality is that we live with these stereotypes. Men who do feminine things are unfairly stereotyped as being gay. Women who have short hair and act more masculine are unfairly stereotyped as being lesbians.

We all know this – we all have these biases in our head. So when see a villain acting stereotypically gay, we make that association. Even those of us who are aware that it’s just a stereotype – we know what’s being hinted at.

To ignore that, and to say that we’re beyond these stereotypes, is the “colorblind” argument. You’re saying that because you’re aware of these stereotypes and you know better, that everyone else has to as well. But that’s not how it works.

People are going to associate these characteristics with queer people, because they associate these stereotypes with queer people. We can want to live in a perfect world where these characteristics have no association with queerness, but we’re not there yet.

Justin on a Computer: Okay, I guess that kinda makes sense, but isn’t this just a made-up Tumblr word? This isn’t like… a real thing.

Oh, man, I don’t know how to break this to you, but, uh, all the words are made up. Like, all of them.

Yeah, so, this is a real sociological theory. There was even a study published in 2003 that examined “the ways in which gender transgression and ‘queering’ are used as an indicator of deviance and villainy in children’s animated full-length movies.” So it didn’t use the term “queercoding,” but that’s exactly what it was. This is often also referred to as the “sissy villain” trope, which the study does talk about.

Regardless, even if there wasn’t a history of this being talked about, that doesn’t disqualify it as a real thing. If someone pointed out a new problem in movies tomorrow, we should give it just as much consideration as we would any older critique.

Because I think we need to be critical of our media, even media that we really enjoy, if we want it to get better. Defending any use of queercoded villains just because you like Disney movies isn’t necessary. We can enjoy media and point out its flaws.

So I’d like to know what you all think about this concept. Have you ever noticed this happening with other villains? Do you think that queercoding villains could warp our perceptions of queer people? Let me know down in the comments.

This video is a part of a series I’m doing for Everyday Feminism, a website dedicated to helping you stand up to and breakdown everyday oppression. I’ll put a link down below so you can check out my previous videos in the series.

And as usual, I love you all very much, I hope have a wonderful day, and I’ll see you next week. Bye!

To learn more about this topic, check out:

Riley J. Dennis is a Contributing Vlogger for Everyday Feminism. She’s a polyamorous, atheist, gender non-binary trans woman with a passion for fiction writing, feminism, and technology. She got her BA from Whittier College in 2015 doing a self-designed major called Writing Worlds, a mixture of creative writing and anthropology, focused on realistic fictional world building. Find her on her YouTube channel, Twitter @RileyJayDennis, or her website RileyJayDennis.com.