What are straightwashing and ciswashing? The worrying trends undermining LGBTQ+ progress

Recent years have seen a surge in LGBTQ+ representation on screen, and you’d be forgiven for thinking we’ve come a long way since 1946, when a biopic of gay composer Cole Porter portrayed him as straight.

One of Netflix’s first original series, prison drama Orange Is The New Black paved the way for better visibility for transgender women of colour and ethnic minorities, while challenging heteronormativity on mainstream TV.

1990s-era makeover show Queer Eye was rebooted on Netflix, and there’s a ninth season on the way in 2024, with interior designer Jeremiah Brent is joining the cast alongside original hosts Jonathan Van Ness, Karamo Brown, Antoni Porowski, and Tan France.

In 2019, Billy Porter made history by becoming the first Black, gay actor to win an Emmy Award in a leading acting category, for his role in Ryan Murphy’s queer drama Pose. His Pose co-star Michaela Jaé Rodriguez became the first trans woman nominated in a major category two years later.

And in 2024, Baby Reindeer star Nava Mau became the first trans woman to be nominated in the limited or anthology series or movie Emmy category.

However, despite these strides forward, it is no secret that the on-screen representation of LGBTQ+ issues and people is still lacking.

In recent years film critics have introduced the term “straightwashing” to highlight the marginalisation of the LGBTQ+ community in Hollywood, television, literature and in history.

What is straightwashing?

Straightwashing is the assimilation of someone who is gay, lesbian, bisexual asexual or other to fit heterosexual cultural norms. Put simply, it’s the practice of portraying non-straight people or characters as straight.

The practice of straightwashing marginalises the LGBTQ+ community by erasing queer people – who are already underrepresented.

But more than that, straightwashing also perpetuates the idea that films or shows need to be made “straight” to appeal to a wider audience, which is rooted in homophobia.

---

Ciswashing, which is the practice of portraying someone who is trans or non-binary as cisgendered, is also a problem.

The issue with straightwashing (and ciswashing) is that it has the ability to undermine the progress of the LGBT+ movement in wider society by obscuring stories of the LGBTQ+ community.

Showing LGBTQ+ lives, experiences, relationships and friendships on screen normalises LGBTQ+ people, which is a step toward eliminating discrimination.

Examples of straightwashing

Despite this, LGBTQ+ characters continue to face obstacles on-screen and in print – particularly in adaptations of comic books.

The X-Men character Mystique, for example, is bisexual in the comic books but has been portrayed as straight in the films the character has appeared in.

The 2018 superhero film Black Panther, marked as a groundbreaking celebration of diversity for it’s predominantly black cast, was criticised for allegedly removing a lesbian romance from the film.

And Star Lord from Guardians of the Galaxy is bisexual and polyamorous in the comics, but not on screen.

After the film was announced, the characters Okoye and Ayo were expected to get together as they do in the comic book.

Also in 2018, the Freddie Mercury biopic Bohemian Rhapsody was accused of straightwashing and bi-erasure. Rami Malek subsequently said he “totally understands” why people accused Bohemian Rhapsody of straightwashing and that he “would’ve loved to have incorporated more” of Queen frontman Freddie Mercury’s bisexuality into the film.

When the erasure was questioned by fans, a Marvel spokesperson replied: “The nature of the relationship between Danai Gurira’s Okoye and Florence Kasumba’s Ayo in Black Panther is not a romantic one.”

It’s not just a recent phenomenon, too – straightwashing has been a problem throughout the history of cinema.

Was Cole Porter gay?

The 1946 biopic Night and Day, which told the story of American composer Cole Porter, who was gay, removed any reference to homosexuality in the film.

In 1935, songwriter Cole Porter started spending more time in Hollywood writing songs for movies and openly embraced his sexuality, throwing hedonistic all-male pool parties every Sunday – though you don’t get even a hint of that when watching Night and Day. Was Cole Porter gay? Yes, but that fact was hidden from viewers.

Even films which centre on the stories of LGBTQ+ lives can’t escape the problem.

The 2015 film Stonewall, based on the riots where LGBTQ+ people protested a police raid at the Stonewall Inn, was criticised for ciswashing and whitewashing for erasing black trans activists Marsha P Johnson and Sylvia Rivera, who led the riots.

Critics pointed out that by removing Johnson and Rivera, the producers were diminishing the accomplishments of transgender people and rewriting history.

What else does straightwashing impact?

It’s not just films or TV programmes themselves that are affected by straightwashing, ciswashing or whitewashing – or a combination of them all – but movie posters and DVD covers too.

In 2017, critics accused Sony UK of straightwashing a poster for the film Call Me By Your Name, the story of a teenage boy who has a sexual relationship with an older man.

One promotional poster showed the boy with a female friend he has a doomed relationship with, rather than the gay romance – which critics argued incorrectly presented the film as heterosexual.

The film Pride, which told the story of a group of London-based gay and lesbian activists who stood up for striking Welsh coal miners in 1984, was also criticised after the film’s distributors in the US removed references to homosexuality on the DVD cover.

The original synopsis for Pride references the “London-based group of gay and lesbian activists” that supported the miners, but the US packaging mentions only “London-based activists” in its version, PinkNews reported at the time.

Stepping away from popular culture, straightwashing can impact incidents too – such as the 2016 shooting at the LGBTQ+ nightclub Pulse in Orlando, which killed 49 people and wounded dozens of others.

In the aftermath of the shooting, activists highlighted how the attack was straightwashed by some politicians who appeared to avoid using the word gay – or any LGBTQ+ terminology – to describe the atrocity.

The Republican National Committee, for example, issued a statement condemning “violence against any group of people simply for their lifestyle or orientation”.

Activists argued denying the nature of the attack as a hate crime against LGBTQ+ people would only perpetuate violence, discrimination and abuse.