It's hard to think of off the top of my head because I admittedly have not gotten into a lot of the more popular examples, and a lot of them mix together, but a typical indication that someone is using the term wrong is if they try to point to evidence inside the show of how the couple should be canon because they have so much chemistry but the creators just won't commit and make it canon. Those are typically just people wearing shipping goggles using the word as a way to say "I want them to be canon, therefore they SHOULD be canon, but they're not, so it's queerbaiting" even though the creators have never at any point indicated that the two characters will ever be in a relationship in advertising, interviews, previous drafts of the script, or otherwise, and at most the actors may have joked about how the ship is popular or mentioned that they personally enjoy it (which isn't the same as using it in marketing or promotional material or teasing the possibility of it becoming canon). Queerbaiting can also take place even if a couple or sexuality DOES become canon if it's halfassed or skimmed over or done poorly. Some famous examples of this are Shiro and his relationships from VLD and Destiel from Supernatural.
Laticauda
I absolutely find it annoying when romance is prioritized over friendship but this isn't quite what queerbaiting is. At least, not on its own. Two same sex/gender people being very close and sharing a strong connection or even having some romantic undertones that never become "official" isn't automatically queerbaiting. Those things can happen in real life without those relationships being or becoming romantic. Queerbaiting is when the writers/showrunners purposefully insert romantic subtext into the story and advertise it as if it will become canonically romantic with the primary intention of gaining more lgbt viewership, while never actually following through on those implied (or even occasionally explicitly stated) promises. The way it is presented and marketed is an important part of what makes it a problem, hence the "baiting" part. There's nothing wrong with keeping a relationship ambiguous, or portraying a platonic relationship as being as deep, important, and emotionally intimate as romantic ones are typically portrayed without making them romantic, but if you try to manipulate or outright lie to viewers to make them think a relationship is going to be something it isn't in order to gain their viewership and support, only to pull the rug out from under them, then that's when it becomes sleazy, especially if you're taking advantage of the fact that they're a marginalized and under-represented group desperate to see more people like them in media.
I know this is just a joke comic so "it's not that deep" but I see a lot of people online who misunderstand what queerbaiting is and accuse shows/series of queerbaiting unfairly so I thought I'd bring it up.
I grew up with celcius and to me it feels more applicable to the human experience. It literally only depends on which one you're more used to, idk why people feel the need to come up with these weird unnecessary "explanations".
I'm not saying they can't be read front to back just that it's not necessarily strange for someone to not fully read a guide/manual/handbook.
It helps to not turn a rather subjective field into a competition.
I've known a couple of gay guys who just think boobs are either weird or a little gross lol.
That's unfortunate. It makes it harder to find the original when too many unsourced copies get reposted elsewhere, and then the original creator doesn't get the credit they deserve. An easy way to keep track of image sources is to add source info into the file save name such as the OP's name and the site it was saved from.
I took some time to find the original, looks like the OP was nshnv on reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/itookapicture/comments/12riaq6/itap_of_tokyo_during_the_rain/
The head. Which is where hats go. The point of the dog wearing pants meme is that both options are still worn on the dog's legs.
"I also choose this guy's dead wife"
So what's the source then if this isn't OC?
Edit with source for those interested: https://www.reddit.com/r/itookapicture/comments/12riaq6/itap_of_tokyo_during_the_rain/
I mean there are a lot of dudes who do not have this "implicit understanding." the difference is more in how normalized it is.
If the characters you're talking about fro. SU are who I think they are, it's also worth mentioning than there were also a lot of hints that one of those characters was acearo or at the very least served as an allegory for the acearo experience, which iirc was eventually confirmed.