Billie Ellish, guilty of gayppropriation

I’m a little behind the curve in my acquaintanceship with the modern Grievance Glossary, but I stumbled across a new term earlier, courtesy of Billie Ellish.


Not quite masturbating, but spiritually a close kin.

Fending off the barbs of today’s Identitarian, sensitivity culture, artists cannot help running afoul of oceans of butthurt if they have an ounce of artistic integrity. If they are a complete sell-out who creates commercial crap modeled around the profitable predominant narratives (I can name a few…), they will be fine, though their product will have the soul of wet toilet paper.

And what is this queerbaiting which bad, bad Billie is guilty of?

According to LGBTQ+ outlet Pink News, queerbaiting is a term that refers to authors, writers or showrunners attempting to attract an LGBTQIA+ audience by consciously hinting at same-sex relationships between characters that are never confirmed nor portrayed.

In the perpetual mission to define today’s dystopic culture I’m always on the look-out for popular signals and archetypes of modern social phenomena.

“Labels” is one excessive gimmick that today’s Identitariat relies on which betrays their location consistently.  Every self-righteous hang-up is labelled and codified, however ambiguous or esoteric it may be.  Heterosexuals who signal homosexual mannerisms and behavior is not new. It’s one of the oddest games in the book despite having little apparent benefit. Especially women and their sisterhoods of sensuality and physical bonding, groupings of lesbian vibes and pretensions.

But these are Identitarian times.  All reprobate behavior that offends the Left must be named and castigated.  Appropriation is even a rude concept. In fact, appropriation is a rehashed term all its own that has come to find wide use in the racial realm

In fact, race is fair game for appropriation, although, in extreme cases like Rachel Dolezal’s, it’s not called appropriation.

too much fro

It’s called other things, some adulatory, but is generally considered legit and worthy of consideration despite its plain absurdity.

It essentially means when creators attempt to attract the LGBTQIA+ community to their work but without having to actually represent them.

This can be harmful due to a lack of legitimate LGBTQ+ representation in certain spheres of the media.

The mental acrobatics involved in keeping this quagmire straight (no pun intended) tests my Give-a-shit computation device.

In other words, I simply don’t care enough to keep at the forefront of the knowledge wave of what is acceptable and not acceptable to the moaners of modern society.

Who cares if you’re “represented” everywhere?  Just be you, you freaks, and quit fretting about acceptance or tolerance. So long as you march around in outrageous attire and stick weird shit up your orifices, and those of others, you’ll never be “normal.”

Granted, using these narrowly defined, self-justifying parameters, Ellie is definitely baiting the queers.


Essentially she is being accused of gay appropriation. She is guilty of signaling to the lesbians while not overtly saying she likes girls, because she doesn’t, at least not in that way. Her cynical motivation being to garner an innate consumer base or audience that is bestowed upon a person for being part of said group’s socially accepted cadre.

That’s what celebrities and politicians do. They manipulate and milk.

I don’t see the problem here.


Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments