irishleo13

[irishleo13]

I've always been a bit skeptical over the Snowball having byler proof but this breakdown is pretty convincing. Like Mike and Dustin being an exact parallel was so unneeded in that shoot when you could have just established Mike's sadness before El appeared if it was meant to just be about her absence

Looking CLOSER at Mike at the Snow Ball (Byler)

Just gotta share that it's CANON that Mike dwelled on Will LONGER than Dustin dwelled on Max:

Dustin was already determined to move on, having no idea if he'd find a girl. Meanwhile, Mike (probably) already knew his date would arrive, and Will (unlike Max) was dancing with someone he hardly knew!

But MIKE is the one who seems to have trouble letting go!

Also, when a director plans shots you usually want to lead the eyes of the viewer to what you want them to notice.

So when Dustin is pining after Max, he's on the EXACT same part of the screen as Max when the shot cuts away to her and Lucas dancing.

This is how you establish that Character A is looking at B in a scene. (Look up Eyeline Match and Eye Trace!)

But we also see the EXACT same thing happening with Mike and Will!

The directors are using the same technique showing that Dustin is looking at Max, to show that Mike is looking at Will.

When it cuts back to Mike and Dustin, they match again:

All this visually implies that Mike feels about Will the same way Dustin feels about Max.

And Mike doesn't look too happy, does he?

The show up to this point made us focus on DUSTIN, and frames the shots deliberately so that we do. Like how a magician distracts viewers to look at something else while doing a magic trick, the directors here have us focus on Dustin but sneak in a Byler clue.

And this episode was directed by the Duffer Brothers...

-teambyler

[irishleo13]

Honestly, people should wonder who Bob is. He’s odd, Thunderbolts New Avengers were group-hugging him, he lives with them… who is he? People have theories, people have ideas, people have memes. They think he’s the boyfriend of each of them. John is appalled because he’s married, damn it! (“Aren’t you in the middle of a divorce?” “But we are talking and we are working on it” “she moved in with another guy, John.” “We are working on it.” “Also Lena should be the one most offended since it’s a literal erasure of her sexuality.” “What about my sexuality? I’m straight!” *everybody laughs*)

Except then Sam Wilson and other Actual Serious Heroes Propervengers With No New At The Front and No Z At The End come in to check the madhouse and look at Bob and ask who he is and everybody visibly panics. Because no one can know, no one should know. Sam becomes more and more suspicious so John - who was literally just sent a John/Bob conspiracy theory board by Ava - blurts out “he’s my boyfriend!”. Record scratches. The pause lasts three full eternities. (“Your…” “boyfriend. Don’t tell my wife! Ex wife. I’m divorced.”) And Sam buys it because if there’s one person who’d have a secret boyfriend that no one can know about that would be John; ex military, all American Rockwell family reject, freshly divorced, just coming to terms with his sexuality. Not ready to publicly come out. Team desperate to help him out and cover for him. Yeah. Ok. They get it. They all buy it. (“Ok John but you really shouldn’t keep a civilian around here” “I live here! With Bob. So, you know.” “K”)

And then unfortunately the Other Avengers (The Proper Avengers? The On Brand Avengers?? The Capvengers???) decide to stay in the AvengerZ tower for at least a couple of long long long days and Bob and John have to pretend to be boyfriends. Share a room. Share a bed. Surprise! Thunderbolts New Avengers 2 is actually a comedy of errors Rom-com!

[irishleo13]

i'm terribly curious what john said to bob in this scene. my guess is "you're alright." but i'm terrible at reading lips.

also didn't notice him leaning against bob before that but i thought that was extra sweet. ❤

[irishleo13]

HOW DOES ONE DRAW KISSES

[irishleo13]

They were insane for this btw....I'm still not over it 😭

[irishleo13]

Wow didn't realize there was more eyewitness parallels beyond the byler rainfight

Does anyone have link that proves the Duffers watched eyewitness?

[irishleo13]

Byler vs mi!even parallels

Or more accurately the juxtaposition between the 2 ships. For those unaware juxtaposition is when  ‘two things are seen or placed close together for contrasting effect.’ I’ve mentioned these before in larger posts (which had various other topics) but I decided to just make a concise post about all the contrasts between the 2 pairings. Because personally I’m more interested in how these pairings contrast  eachother rather than the few things they have in common.

1) Will & El calling for Mike in the upsidedown-in s2ep2

AND- Mike only coming to help Will (not El).

It was like how Nancy in s1 called for Jon, and jonathan pulled her out of the upsidedown.  And as Jonathan and Mike both pull Nancy and Will back from the upside down , Jonathan says “I got you”. And Mike says “I got him “ twice. But mileven is like how barb while in the upsidedown called for Nancy (but nancy didn’t hear her screaming her name-cause it shows symbolically Nancy does not return Barb’s romantic feelings). Just like mileven

2)  “crazy together” vs “what makes you crazy?”. And “so stupid” vs “not stupid”.

Flo  in s1: “only love makes you that crazy and that damn stupid.”

Mike: “if we’re both going crazy. we’ll go crazy together right?”will: “yeah, crazy together “ *smile and stare longingly at eachother *————————————————————-Mike: “they do say it makes you crazy”El: “what makes you crazy?”(the exact opposite of crazy together as she continues to be confused over every explanation he gives of love 😂)————————————————————-During the byler fight  Mike says “el’s not stupid!” After this, Will calls himself “ so stupid “ 4x .  rips up photo where they said they’d go crazy together and cries . But, El after fighting with mike happily says: “there’s more to life than STUPID boys .”  El’s catchphrase being “not stupid” which she says in s2 before going to see Mike at the school. And Nancy before Mike says he loves El / Mike during the byler fight (about mi!even) say “El’s not stupid!” Cause Will not El loves Mike.

3a-3e) Mi!even Breakup vs byler Fight: pics,comics, first boyfriend vs never getting a gf, apologies, and cinematic framing

A) El right after she dumps Mike looks at a pic of a male celebrity ,and gushes /giggles over the pic. Will cries looking at the Halloween pic of mike from Halloween (where they said they would go ‘crazy together’) rips it in ½ splitting pic-mike and pic- Will apart.

B) after the breakup Max introduces her to wonder women comics and says she shouldn’t spend all her time with Mike. (And El and max happily read comics. El is not even thinking about Mike but the comic’s story). Will at cb tries reading a comic to distract himself from the fight he had with mike- but angrily throws it to the ground unable to distract himself. Then he proceeds to cry and have his breakdown.

C) El after the breakup refers to Mike as her “first boyfriend” (after gushing over boys in a magazine). Implying more bfs (other than Mike) in the future (and her desire to have other boyfriends other than Mike). Will during his fight with Mike admits he never wanted to get a gf but just wanted to be with Mike for the rest of his life .

s3 script:

D) Mike never apologized for “lying” to El. With Will he apologized immediately and went into a storm to apologize a 2nd time. Like max assumed Mike would do with El- Mike ran to Will (as Max said) “begging for forgiveness”. But with El he says “what did i do wrong?’ 2x (Kind of like how ted, after pissing off karen says “what did I do?” 2x). And then Mike waits by the phone for her to apologize- while saying sexist stuff about her/laughing over cheese-burps. And instead of saying sorry for lying- he just apologizes for being “jealous” of the Elmax friendship which was only established after he lied.

E) framing of the breakup/fight.Mike has drastically different expressions after the byler/mi!even fights and the difference in weather and music selection ,convey how Mike is feeling. He looks regretful with Will, and almost annoyed with El dumping him.  Mi!even breaks up to upbeat music on a sunny day (the break up being in front a crowd and a joke) vs the morose music and the storm shown (with just Mike and Will fighting ). We are supposed to take the byler fight seriously and the mi!even one as a joke.One scene was supposed to make us sad another was a joke (of a stereotypical middle school breakup). One ends with Will crying and the other has el laughing and high fiveing Max as the lyric “she is cold as ice” plays. I mean - El lied to her friends the day before but then dumps mike for doing the same…k’ (that doesn’t scream how childish/not serious m*leven is).

4) Byers Shed scene vs Pool Shed scene: "best thing I’ve ever done” vs “most important thing”

When Mike says in the pool shed she’s the “most important thing in the world” to him. she cuts him off and says Hopper is right about them spending too much time together. But when Mike in the shed says asking Will to be his friend was the “best thing he’s ever done” (it was practically the cliche of true love breaking the curse) XD.

When Mike says to El  “you’re most IMPORTANT thing to me” in the pool shed. In s1 Lucas told Mike “remember , El is the most IMPORTANT thing”. And in s3 when Mike mimics Lucas’ sentiment/phrase- steve in s3 says “everything people (lucas) tell you is IMPORTANT (m*leven) is b*llshit.” why in s3 dustin calls m*leven “b*llshit” too. El doesn’t even acknowledge the comment (and neither should the audience- cause the words were empty/ b*llshit). The framing of this mi!even scene was not cinematic or heartfelt, and neither was the delivery from Mike. He’s not crying, trying to reach her with proclamations of his genuine feelings. There’s no dramatic music, framing, lighting or shot composition (and the scene was incredibly short).And El just responds and cuts his supposed ‘true feelings’ off- only to agree with Hopper and says “ what if he’s right”  . I didn’t speed this up FYI.

Juxtaposed to the MUCH longer byler shed scene. A literal single tear falling down his cheek as Mike , recounts the first day they met. This whole monologue is only of tight shots of just their faces (their bodies aren’t shown like in the pool shed scene). With contrasting colors of light and shadow.This is a personal moment between them and them alone- and the fact we zoom in on their faces (expresses this to be important emotionally) . And when we see Will’s reaction to Mike saying “it was the best thing I’ve ever done”. We just see Will’s face only- no music is playing and all we hear is  Will’s whimpers and Mike crying in the background.*

5) (At Will’s house)Max & Mike talk about  Mike’s “trust” in Will despite being a “spy”- VS- (At El’s house) Max & Mike talk about Mike’s “distrust “ of El for being a “spy” .

Max in s2 at Will’s house questions how Mike can still trust Will now that he’s a spy for the mf . Max (in s3) at El’s house: says that Mike doesn’t trust El- and Mike mentions that her spying is why he doesn’t trust her.   Mike in s2: “if anyone could stop them it’s Will“. Max: “ I thought we couldn’t trust him that he’s a spy for the mf now?” Max in s3 calling Mike out  : “El has saved the world twice. And Mike still doesn’t trust her.” Mike: you want to talk about trust really?! after… Eleven spied on us! I guess girlfriends don’t lie they SPY!”

Keep reading

[irishleo13]

[Mentions of ST5 leaks below.]

I've been thinking about Linda Hamilton's mysterious role in S5. Leaks tend to agree that she plays a military character of some sort, but I dunno how difficult a guess that is to make given how much of a gun-toting badass her Terminator character is.

Most of ST's guest stars tend to be cast in roles that reflect the classic 80s movies they were in -- Paul Reiser plays a representative of an exploitative institution like in Aliens; Sean Astin solves a puzzle map that leads to underground tunnels like in The Goonies; Robert Englund plays (the father of) a heavily-scarred, mind-walking child murderer like in A Nightmare on Elm Street, etc -- but is that true for all of them?

What does Larry Kline (the slimy Mayor who screws over small businesses to protect the interests of a large corporation) have in common with Cary Elwes's most famous role (the dashing, swashbuckling farmhand-turned-pirate from Princess Bride)? The similarities may not be immediately obvious, but I think they're clearer when you remember that Elwes also played Robin Hood -- Larry Kline is an ironic reversal of the working-class hero Elwes is known for.

What if Linda Hamilton has been cast as an ironic reversal of Sarah Connor?

Sarah Connor is the mother of humanity's future savior, and by Terminator 2, the burden of ensuring that he survives being the target of a genocidal time-travelling AI has turned her into a hardened solider plagued by nightmares of children dying in an apocalypse she's helpless to prevent.

You can hardly blame her for feeling helpless. Even without the time-travelling robots, she's just one woman trying to make a stand against powerful institutions: the military-funded lab that's ignorantly creating the AI her son is destined to oppose; the asylum doctors who think she's a raving lunatic unfit to raise a child.

It's very reflective of 80s anxieties -- not just the Cold War threat of nuclear annihilation, but the conservative threat of social annihilation in the name of silencing misunderstood minorities.

A reversal of Sarah Connor would, therefore, be someone who is still obsessed with protecting children from a rogue (time-travelling? 🤞) hivemind -- but from the conservative, institutionalized power side of things.

In other words: exactly the sort of antagonistic force that was foreshadowed in the S4 epilogue.

(Should the leaks be true, then this would be the real reason for casting Hamilton in a military role.)

Following this train of thought: if we're getting a villain who's focused on "protecting" children, then what does that suggest about the fact that Holly Wheeler -- 7 year-old sister of a gay Hellfire member and frequent innocent witness to The Horrors that surround him -- is shaping up to be one of Henry's targets in S5?

Let's talk about Ted and Karen.

I feel like these two tend to be misunderstood by the fandom. Either they're frothing bigots who would kick Mike out of the house the instant they found out he was queer, or they're chill allies who have been assuming that Mike was dating Will this whole time.

But that's what Will's parents are like. As a visible gay kid who's playing the stereotypical Sad Gay Boy archetype, it makes sense for Will to have parents that represent the obvious extremes of queer acceptance: Lonnie is never going to be convinced that it's anything other than shameful for his son to be queer, and Joyce is never going to be convinced that there's anything wrong with the way her son loves.

But Mike is the invisible, ambiguously straight-passing kid deep in the throes of comphet -- his role is to surprise the audience by subverting their expectations. And so it's important, I think, that his parents represent the subtler attitude that best reflects his story: the ignorant conformists.

They're the sort of people who get offended when they're accused of bigotry -- they're not hateful, heaven forbid! -- but who still passively support bigoted systems because they refuse to stand up like Sarah Connor or Joyce Byers and challenge the status quo.

While I do believe that "our son with a girl?" is a queer-coded line, I don't think the point was necessarily to suggest that Ted knows about Mike's queerness.

Consider the full context of that scene: Brenner was pressuring the Wheelers to rat Mike out so that this weird kid he was hiding (literally in his closet at one point!) could be apprehended, and he easily won them over with a little "protect the children" fearmongering:

The Wheelers want to support Mike -- but they can only understand his behaviour within the heteronormative white suburban context they're used to, and they'll readily trust authorities they absolutely should not be trusting to explain what help he needs.

Unlike Lonnie, though, the Wheelers have the capacity to change in this regard -- and have slowly been doing so. They immediately clocked the ridiculousness of the town's Satanic Panic in S4, and the last time we saw them, they demonstrated a promising willingness to question authority and roll their eyes at conservative fearmongering.

But they haven't completed their redemption arc just yet. Holly's disappearance will be an important test of their commitment to this change in attitude.

Picture a redux of that S1 scene, with Hamilton's character in Brenner's role: "I understand your skepticism. It seems ridiculous that there are people in our town who are so committed to hurting children. But cultists are a different breed. Do you remember what happened to Will Byers four years ago? You don't really believe that he randomly got lost in the woods for a week, do you? The same week another child was found dead in the quarry? We can help your daughter, but only if you act now. Tell us where your misguided son and that deeply unwell boy he's a little too close to have gone."

Do they give in to the fearmongering and throw Mike under the bus for Holly's sake?

Or do they clock this bullshit for what it is and decide to peek behind the curtain -- and finally become the sort of parents Mike needs them to be?

[irishleo13]

Claim your "I was a Byler before s5 came out" here

[irishleo13]

reddit melvins in their byler era

It's so funny and ironic how milevens recently are so obsessed with her ring when thats the exact kind of thing they would bash bylers for. Pointing out something not mentioned in the show itself and ultimately a background detail

[irishleo13]

reddit melvins in their byler era

It's so funny and ironic how milevens recently are so obsessed with her ring when thats the exact kind of thing they would bash bylers for. Pointing out something not mentioned in the show itself and ultimately a background detail

[irishleo13]

"Friends don't lie..."

"... but boyfriends do."

-teambyler

("Mike, Will, and the Only Lie They've Kept")

[irishleo13]

Frankly if byler doesn't happen, the duffers have doomed Will to a sad ending and excluded from actually having a meaningful romantic relationship unlike most of the rest of the cast

Anti-Bylers: “There’s no time for Mike to find out he's gay, come out, and have a romance with Will in the final season”

Also anti-Bylers: “Mike will gently reject him and mend things with Eleven after they both realize that his love confession was based on a lie. Then Will will get over his life-long love for Mike and fall in love with a brand-new boy the audience hasn't met yet who the writers will make a fan favorite so that Will can have a happy ending”

-teambyler

[irishleo13]

Foreshadowing 101

Chekhov's gun includes the writing principle that every detail matters. This includes every piece of dialogue, even what seem to be throwaway lines. In fact, once you know about it, it can ruin TV and movies for some people.

We know why the scriptwriters inserted this line:

It was so he could be proven wrong.

Meanwhile they also inserted this line...

There's a REASON they put it in! =D

-teambyler

[irishleo13]

How much of “El” was actually in Will’s van speech, why this scene does NOT point to him letting Mike go, and what we actually know about Will's arc/Byler because of it

I know everyone jokes about the Will crying in the van shot so we sometimes forget how serious of a moment that was but like…..he was devastated. It’s always bothered me when people act as though this scene was about El in any genuine way, and that the message to take away is that Will is accepting Mike and El love each other and starting to move on. Both of these things couldn’t be further from the truth, they’re just convenient interpretations to fit a certain narrative.

In reality, Will assumed what El feels because he loves Mike, and that’s how he feels. There was no conversation between him & El, nothing Will ever witnessed, for him to determine that Mike "makes her feel like she’s better for being different”, that that helps her "fight". It’s what El wanted to feel from Mike, but she clearly didn’t (“You think I’m a monster too”). We never see Mike uplift her for her differences throughout the entire time they're dating, and then in s4 El gets a plot about feeling like she doesn't fit in (“I am different”) and actively lies to Mike about it ??? So...when exactly does Mike make her feel like she's "not a mistake at all"? El doesn't even feel safe giving him the opportunity, in fact she actively refuses to repeatedly: lying in her letters, asking Angela to lie to Mike at the rink, in their fight when he tries to understand & she tells him he doesn't. (And then when he tries in the monologue to use the sentiment “I love you for exactly who you are” etc.…she loses.)

And aside from that, explaining the painting and its meaning was the most blatant lie we see Will tell, and that’s all him. El didn't say all these wonderful things she loves about Mike, didn't create a gift inspired by something personal to Mike (DnD) to emphasise that message. Those were Will’s thoughts and feelings, unquestionably. There is nothing to suggest that El perceives Mike in that way ("the heart", "guiding the party, inspiring us", "without [you] we'd all fall apart"), that she understands Mike and knows exactly what to say to make him feel important, special and needed, that she loves him the way Will loves him (which just coincidentally happens to encompass exactly what Mike needs to hear to soothe his insecurities (“I’m just some random nerd” etc.)). And frankly even if we pretend El thinks the exact same things, Will was the one who did the work to make Mike happy. The idea that El should be able to coast on the efforts of someone else because "well she obviously feels the same way" (where ???) is kind of disturbing. Mike deserves better, and it makes no sense that the writers would narratively reward a love interest who put no effort into showing how much Mike is valued vs one who went above and beyond to make him feel loved.

That speech only applied to El insofar as Will sprinkles in "these past months she's been lost without you", "she's so different from other people", "we'd all fall apart, even El, especially El" and "if she was mean to you/seemed like she was pushing you away". Not because El said any of this, but because it's plausible for Will to come to these conclusions on his own and think he's correct (and even be partially correct). He knows El was doing awful in Lenora because she is different, he knows she's part of the group and has experienced Mike's leadership, he knows she fought with Mike and then left him. All of these things also affect him - he missed Mike's friendship while they were separated, he's different because of his sexuality, he's part of the group too, he "sabotaged" the day in Mike's eyes after not reaching out much and we know he's scared of losing Mike due to his feelings.

But the rest? "Of course she needs you Mike, she'll always need you", "You make her feel like she's not a mistake, like she's better for being different and that gives her the courage to fight", "if she [...] was pushing you away, it's just because she's scared of losing you" (I do think that one's partially true but Will wouldn't know beyond a guess), “if she was gonna lose you I think she’d want to get it over with quick", "El needs you and she always will” (and of course "El commissioned it" and the compliments he gives after)...who is Will to make those claims? He doesn't know how El feels, he didn't even know El was lying to Mike, she clearly doesn't confide in Will about her relationship. No, these things are all Will guessing/outright lying and letting his own feelings slip through. And just in general outside of Will, El hasn’t done/said anything elsewhere in the show to confirm that she feels any of this (in fact it was de-confirmed, in the case of the “better for being different” stuff).

Essentially, it’s all just Will's assumptions about El, some of which are based in reality and some of which are Will projecting. But most importantly, the reassurance and comfort he gives (the painting stuff) in response to Mike talking disparagingly about himself are Will and no-one else, and part of the most blatant lie he tells (“she told me what to draw [...] your coat of arms, it's a heart [...] without heart we'd fall apart”) is specifically what is called back to to push Mike into confessing!

Now, the idea of Will "accepting the reality" of Mike loving El is so ridiculously irrelevant. Will was heartbroken after he did what he did, this boy was literally sobbing out the window, but the whole reason he does is because he fully 100% believes Mike loves El. He knows, people! He spends the entire season giving Mike advice and pushing him towards her. Why would Will need to "accept" something he's been actively supporting before and during this scene? In his mind it's fully unrequited and he's operating within that reality in the most selfless, helpful, unobstructive way! He's not in denial, he has no hope.

What they really mean is he needs to move on and that this scene is somehow an indication that he is, but again, no: "[I] need you, and [I] always will" is Will's final projection before he cries his eyes out, and then later on we see him miserably staring at them again. The fact is, Will has accepted his "reality", that just didn't lead to him getting over Mike. No, it led to him sacrificing something he poured his heart into to save Mike’s relationship because he thinks that what will make Mike happy is to be with El, so he's making that happen. He is a bigger M!leven shipper than anyone. He still loves Mike, shows no signs of letting go, but he's just that selfless. And it's perfect, because no amount of knowing Mike loves El seems to change how much Will loves Mike. Incredibly inconvenient for a "plot" that relies on the gay character’s silly feelings magically disappearing out of reverence for a het couple and their deep soulmate love……

But this is why some people try to invent an imaginary arc where Will was somehow trying to get in the way of M!leven/had hope Mike could feel the same way, because otherwise you just get: Will likes Mike, knows it's hopeless, and then it randomly fizzles out lmao. Everyone knows that's not an arc; there's no change, no development, nothing learned. Plus, if Will is already in full acceptance of M!leven endgame…what’s next seaon's alleged rejection going to do/change? Nothing, Will’s feelings aren’t dependent on Mike reciprocating as has been shown, so the only purpose would be rubbing salt in the wound. And again, you end up with not an arc but a flat, depressing line. Will likes Mike, knows it's hopeless, has it painfully reaffirmed that yes it is hopeless, and then fizzle. If you know stories you know this makes zero sense, and therefore is not happening 👍

[irishleo13]

The Strange Postponement of Mike and Will's relationship

If Mike and Will had remained as close as they were in Season 2 in the subsequent seasons, the "are they gay?" rumors absolutely would have spread among the General Audience, as they entered their teen/dating/sexual awakening years.

(EDIT: And the possibility of romance between them in s2 was "set aside" in our minds because the show highlighted Mike missing El and trying to find her.)

There have been peculiar writing choices that seem to have no other explanation but to postpone romantic rumors about these two.

The show does its damnedest to keep these best-friends-since-kindergarten apart once they enter puberty. The only interaction that possibly hints at romance in Season 3 is their virtual double date with Lumax where Mike is concerned for Will's well-being one time. This was necessary to reestablish their "good friendness" at the start of the season to set-up their breakup during the Rain Fight.

Then, of course, the Rain Fight happens. Mike says "It's not my fault you don't like girls." They effectively "break up."

But then there is the strange, interesting choice that there is never a resolution of the Rain Fight. The apology for ignoring Will's D&D game comes from Lucas instead of Mike:

Will had his blow-up with MIKE, not Lucas! And we know that Mike absolutely was DRIVEN to apologize to Will, but we don't see it. Maybe he actually did, but it was offscreen. But why not have it ON screen? Why not clear the air on whether Mike thought Will was gay and was being homophobic to Will? Why not clarify THEN that Mike is a straight ally who supports his gay best friend, setting things up for Will to have a coming-out arc where he finds a love interest who is not Mike?

Instead, the writers made sure they had NO conversations for nearly all the rest of the season. They made sure Mike was focused on trying to repair things with El and blurting out "I love her." These two things together also kept the Gay Rumors(TM) in check.

Season 4 then dramatizes how they'd GROWN APART -- specifically, how they don't seem to have stayed in touch and Mike seems to be ignoring Will.

What a strange thing for the writers to do! Mike and Will had been on good terms. That's because it was the start-of-season set-up for an ARC where they become close again.

Alright, so they soon repair things. But for what?

The Will Counseling Hour:

They literally have no conversations with each other where Will isn't comforting Mike or they're not talking about El, to the extent that much of the GA thought that Mike was "useless" and the California plotline was a "waste of time."

(Either the Duffers were bad writers or had a reason to spend so much time on the California plot. Hmm...)

The show was putting Byler in a holding pattern. The show established that Mike and Will were close again, but with a "beard" on Mike: his relationship with El. Will's attempt to talk about anything ELSE -- like playing Nintendo and D&D -- was ignored as Mike worried about El.

The Will Counseling Hour ends -- and Mike and Will talking about anything besides El -- only happens with their very LAST conversation of season 4, when Will shares that he can still feel Vecna. Mike is now the Counselor: he resolves that they will beat Vecna. The bringing of these two together, along with signs that Mike and El are drifting apart, lays the trajectory for Season 5.

Season 5 will be the first season with Unfiltered Byler(TM) since Season 2.

EVERYTHING that kept the GA from thinking about the possibility of Byler, (1) how young they were in Season 2, (2) their being kept artificially apart and (3) Mike's focus on his relationship with El, will have fallen away.

For the first time since Season 2, the A Plot of the show and Mike and Will being close ("a team") will mesh.

Meanwhile, we'll get Season 2 Mike because Will will also be the center of the story and IN DANGER. It's impossible to imagine Mike being his aloof start-of-Season-4 self. Add to all this Season 4 hormones: we're likely to see the heart-eyes romantic, Will-Voice-speaking boy in love we Bylers see in the 2nd half of Season 4.

And there's the Painting Lie, which the Duffers have told Finn Wolfhard will "pay off in the end." Mike WILL KNOW Will loves him, and loved him so much as to sacrifice himself for him.

Even if one doesn't accept Byler, one can't deny that there has to be a DIRECT RECKONING over whether Mike returns Will's feelings.

The entire structure of how the show has presented their relationship is building up toward this. The Strange Postponement of Byler had a purpose.

-teambyler

EDIT: You might enjoy my s5 speculations in "How the Duffers likely will make the general audience AWARE of Byler and CHEER for Byler" =D

[irishleo13]

The most hypocritical anti Byler argument:

"Why can't two boys just be friends? Why do you have to make everything gay!?"

Whenever I hear this argument or some variation of it, I think back to my two cousins, one a girl and the other a boy. (He was from my dad's side of the family; she was from my mom's.) They were maybe six years old at the time, and they were innocently talking and playing and giving each other math and spelling-bee quizzes. ALL my family were giggling, saying they were going to be boyfriend and girlfriend.

I also think back to all the times I see young girls being judged on their physical beauty and told they're going to have a handsome boy when they grow up because they're so pretty.

From childhood, boys and girls have their sexuality assumed for them. Their SEXUALITY and romantic possibility are talked about openly in front of their face. They're made to look at themselves sexually before they even want to.

So when people yell at Byler fans saying "Why do you have to make everything gay?" I want to scream at them:

"Why do you have to make everything straight!?"

Why do you insist on sexualizing children to be heterosexual even before they're ready to start thinking of themselves in those terms?

Why do you have no problem with Mike kissing El in season 1 right after she asks him if he's like her "brother"?

Why do you idealize their relationship when they were children, while simultaneously trying to shame Byler fans for trying to "sexualize children" even though these are fictional characters and the actors who play Mike and Will are already adults?

Why do you shame any thought or possibility of homosexual romance, while imposing heterosexual norms on everyone?

It reminds me of people who say "You can be gay of course... just don't shove it in our faces (by holding forth that you're gay, kissing in public, etc.)." When no one bats an eye when straight people do the same thing. They might claim they're not homophobic, but actual equal treatment of LGBT+ people they don't accept.

It's Straight Privilege in action: the norms and standards that straight people enjoy quietly do not to apply to us.

This hypocrisy even distorts how Milkvans view Mike and El. We're told that if Mike and Will get together, that would mean Mike "used El" and El would never be able to forgive him.

Not only does this disregard that people can have amicable break-ups and still be close friends: it also shows that the idea of a platonic loving relationship between a Mike and El is beyond their comprehension. To them, the only loving relationships boys and girls can have with each other are romantic ones.

(Now, before anyone objects: sure many people accept Robin and Steve, but that's because Robin is canonically gay. We all know that before she came out many of us (me included!) were shipping those two as a couple!)

If someone ships Mike and El WITHOUT her confronting him about his poor treatment of her in early s4, without there being an honest conversation about that, this definitely raises an eyebrow from me. The "love confession" didn't address this: his fear of losing her did NOT explain his failing to comfort her or failing to say he loved her. Theoretically it's possible for these two to repair things. (And if Milkvan is endgame I hope that they do by addressing this!) But for some Milkvan shippers the need to address Mike's behavior doesn't even enter their minds because they're idealizing their relationship. In other words, THEY are imposing their idea of a relationship on these two, much in the same way my family was imposing their own ideas on my two cousins without regard to the people involved.

So if anyone asks "Why can't two boys just be friends? Why do you have to make everything gay?" it's purely hypocritical and dishonest. No, we just want THIS relationship between Mike and Will (which is clearly being built up as romantic) to be gay out of a sea of heterosexual relationships on TV.

No. THEY are the ones who rule out a boy and girl just being friends. THEY are the ones who insist on imposing romance on a boy and girl when they're not ready. THEY are the ones who insist on "everything" being one way.

-teambyler