#*with the way this fandom has been acting and accusing louis of things

[loumands]

My favorite Louis’ strategic lie by omission moment is still when in the first episodes he conveniently shows himself and Lestat going to sleep only when they happen to be fighting so he can imply that they sleep in separate coffins, but then Claudia’s narration later reveals they actually mostly sleep in the same coffin and those scenes were just the vampiric equivalent of Lestat being exiled to the couch

[redandyellowziam]

A view from 30,000 ft. Sometimes you "can't see the forest for the trees." Out of all the members of One Direction, who has expressed the most public vocal support for said group? Who, since the "hiatus" has on more than a few occasions been hinting at a reunion for the group? Who has routinely given public praise and support for the other members of the band on their latest projects? So, if you thought to sabotage all of that goodwill and brotherhood and unleash a firestorm within the fandom and GP; whom would you choose to be the vehicle to accomplish your goal? Who else but the spokesman for all things One Direction and the favorite punching bag of the "fandom" Liam James Payne. Talk about killing two birds with one stone.

Timing, why now? Why Minnesota? Harry, out promoting his latest album answers a question seemingly differently than the interviewer expected by saying that all of the members of One Direction still love each other. Louis, in the midst of a successful world tour with PRIDE flags everywhere. Zayn launches a merch line which highlights color combinations that many believe represents his relationship with Liam. Liam's two weeks old "relationship" reportedly has ended. Yes people, two weeks. All of this happens around the start of PRIDE MONTH.

Within a narrative discerning fact from fiction is difficult. The words that someone says may not be their own. If a contract can, force you to say that you are the father of a child that in fact is not yours. Then they can force you to say anything. He/she who contractually controls your public image controls the way the public sees you. Corrupt narratives are meant to be convoluted, meant to confuse. Thus, less likely to be understood much less believed. The purpose of the confusion is to shield the narrator and call into question the very existence of the narrative itself. Example, Harry with a burgeoning career, a "nontraditional wardrobe," however girlfriend narrative tentacles still attached. The tricky part is that not every word or act is part of the narrative, part of the sabotage. So, you look for clues by those controlled by the narrative. In this case teddy bears, tattoos, song lyrics, wardrobe. The lads are speaking. The question is anyone listening.

Five albums in five years. A stream of girlfriends to parade before the public and the first baby daddy narrative. The band rebels against label/mgmt. for this and many other reasons. The five members refuse to renew their contract. Label/mgmt. retaliates by creating a narrative that the band is going on "hiatus." Talk of infighting, disagreements and jealousy ensue. Also, a narrative.

So, it continues. It could be just another bump in the road on the long One Direction trail. Or it could be a slow decent of the beginning of the end of this long nightmare that the lads have been subjected to for the last 11/12 years. I believe it's the ladder, the narrators are running out of time. Contracts have an end date.

Whichever one it is, currently:

Each actor is under contract. Each actor has a narrative. Each narrative is different, and no actor controls his narrative.

Liam has always been the spokesperson of 1D, that never changed. I'm not mad at any of the boys, I just wish that they would show their support for Liam. Because Liam does it too, for all of them.

It's easy to point a finger at someone and accuse them of things, but to dig deeper and find out the reasons for someone's behaviour is something most people don't do.

People always hated on Liam and I don't think it will stop anytime soon, but you're right 'they're all under a contract', but apparently it's a fact people love to forget/ignore when it comes to Liam.

Liam is a wonderful person and I'll forever hate his team for making him someone he'll never be, in the public eye.

In reality: All of their teams suck at their job and I hope you're right.

[persephoneflouwers]

Idk why some people here have to complain about people calling out lh for their problematic behaviour. Like if you want to defend louis mentioning that kid in every interview then go ahead but some of us are not comfortable with that because its problematic and some want to unstan or leave the fandom. You are no right to tell them they are any less of a fan. FUCK YOU (Not you Angie). Like someone said here some people have become to comfortable with their closets. Even if its morally wrong they don't mind defending it. He himself is talking about that kid no one is forcing him to do that or is asking about it. Also you don't have to tell larries what a fucking closet is, we know what a closet is, thats why we are here. But this is wrong, using a kid, when you have a girlfriend.

Hello 🌸

I don’t like when people say “you’re not a real fan if…” or “you should leave” and so on. Everyone reacts to things in different ways because their responses come from different experiences in and out the fandom.

There’s not a best way to take this shit in, I fear. You’re not a better fan if you defend any of their moves and you’re not a better fan if you don’t tolerate any of this anymore. I strongly believe everyone has their boundaries and those red zones that you are like ‘alright if you take that step, I’m out”. Everyone has their own personal journey with this and nobody should tell you what or what not to do. It’s easy to let people decide for themselves. I’ve changed my approach to the fandom and since then things have been improving for me in terms of accepting what it’s happening stunt wise, but also career wise to both of them. I was furious with Louis when the Bentley mom situation happened! I had people saying to me I was turning against Louis… that is absolutely nuts because you really can’t pretend you are not your own person for the sake of defending somebody who is acting in ways you would never approve.

I also think the main controversy here got a bit lost because I don’t think larries are okay with the bg return in auge, but some of them are not okay with the fact that there’s this new school of thought sustaining Louis is in control of it (or some shit, honestly. Honestly.) and for them that’s why these mentions are unprompted or whatever. And even in this I leave people space and time to come to their own conclusions, that usually I don’t agree with lol.

In my brief experience here, I can say usually the positions are polarised in literally any discussion. For example you will find people say “you hate closeted people” if you dare complain of certain things and on the other side people accusing “you want them to stay in the closet”. There’s never an in between.

Except for the fact that there’s always a spectrum of colours happening in between black and white.

[i-want-my-iwtv]

I hope the rumours of Louis being a brothel owner aren't true, but if they are I can sort of see why they're going for this route? I mean, with a black Louis they can't have him being a slaver anymore, so maybe they're trying to find something that is also morally reprehensible for him to be.

TL;DR: My kneejerk reaction was to be saddened, and I don’t like that this is starting up, and will continue to fuel, fandom drama. Ultimately, if we want peace, we’ll embrace the fact that the existence of this adaptation doesn’t take away from the existence of the books, and it also doesn't mean we have to acknowledge it.

It makes me wonder whether AMC wants us to make a storm about this. We’ll see...

After all, what makes this adaptation any more important than the graphic novels of the ’90s, the graphic novel Claudia’s Story, movie!IWTV, or movie!QOTD? In fact, many fans here on tumblr consider VC to be a trilogy only!!! and don’t accept the majority of the PUBLISHED CANON so what makes anyone think we have any obligation to swallow this AMC adaptation as some kind of gospel?

I see movie!QOTD as a buffet of ideas carried in an official fanfiction work, and I don’t accept as my headcanon the various things it changed about the books that I didn’t particularly like, such as merging Magnus and Marius (which, IMO, effectively made both characters more morally reprehensible). I accepted the things I did enjoy, like casting a Black/POC actress to play Akasha. I see this AMC adaptation as a buffet of ideas, some can be taken, and some not, it’s just another official fanfiction work.

[Anon, I need to catch other ppl up on the information, too.]

Deadline.com informs us that in the AMC adaptation for Interview with the Vampire, Jacob Anderson has been cast as Louis. I'm not familiar with him, but it looks like he’s a successful actor, from Game of Thrones and other things, he’s also joining Series 13 of Doctor Who. I’ll have to check him out from an acting standpoint!

Aside from his talent as an actor, this is by far the most controversial thing that's happened in VC fandom recently. I've been thinking about this for a few months now, talking about it privately online and offline, still gathering my thoughts. So this post is not engraved in stone, it’s initial thoughts on this.

I’m glad to see ppl talking about it and I’m sure we’ll have more public discussions. I’m trying to discuss it very carefully, but also, this is an entertainment blog, my opinions are mine alone, and I’m not looking for dogpiling on anyone, I have no obligation to respond publicly or privately to anything. Plenty of other ppl have differing opinions on this. So take all of the following with more than a grain of salt, I’m not being salty, I’m providing the links to the little info we’ve seen pulicly, I’m giving my initial thoughts, and I’m also trying to add a little levity because ultimately, again, this is an entertainment blog, and I try to add a little humor to help with such serious topics, humor can help ppl talk about controversial things.

-----

The casting of a POC/Black actor (I’m sorry I don't know the preferred terminology, let me know if you know what Anderson prefers) confirms at least one part of theilluminerdi articles that stated that Louis’ race will be different from the books. I didn’t post about these before bc I wasn’t sure how reliable theilluminerdi’s sources are (and I'm still not sure), but this was one major aspect that theilluminerdi announced before Deadline did, so now seems to be the right time to share those articles. For now, you can go check them out yourselves rather than have my reposting of the information, trigger warning: mentions of sex workers and race in the changes to the canon story of Interview with the Vampire.

>>>theilluminerdi articles from May 21, 2021 and July 15, 2021:

www.theilluminerdi.com/2021/05/21/interview-with-the-vampire-amc

www.theilluminerdi.com/2021/07/15/interview-with-the-vampire-amc-2

^Meme of Dr. Ian Malcom from Jurassic Park reads: “Your writers were so preoccupied with whether they could that they didn’t stop to think if they should.”

I’m using that meme with a little levity here, clearly an AMC adaptation of vampires in which the producers/writers have chosen to change the race of a main character (arguably the original protagonist of the series) isn’t in the same VICINITY as the dinosaurs in Jurassic Park that broke out of containment and killed visitors to the park, but John Hammond’s intention for the creation of that park was very good, as I assume this race change was intended. Time will tell.

“But with this place, I wanted to show them something that wasn't an illusion. Something that was real, something that they could see and touch. An aim not devoid of merit.”

“Creation is an act of sheer will.” 

- John Hammond, Jurassic Park

Race is a more complicated subject than ever, so for AMC to make this bold change, I hope they have POC and Black writers on staff and are handling this very carefully. Even then, no racial group, including POC and Black people, are a hivemind, disagreements are bound to happen in the writing room, whether in good faith or bad. People have different intentions and motives, compromises will probably be made with the story in many ways, we all know how it goes with collaborations; the end product is a shared vision among multiple creators. This could be a potentially controversial adaptation, I don’t know whether they’re aiming for that or not, but with the elements it has so far, it seems to be headed that way.

Here's a comment by "Angellus" on the 5/21 article. It's undeniable that there's going to be the accusation of racism thrown at anyone who has any negative view of this change, regardless of their reasons. I find it unfair and narrow-minded that any negative response is automatically assumed to be coming from a racist point of view. To say that changing Louis' race is unequivocally an improvement fails to take into account how that change has a Domino effect on all of the other parts of the story. Not the least of which is that, if he is still a slaver/slave holder/plantation owner/(insert your preferred term) that adds a whole new racist element to his owning Black/POC people, even though, apparently there were Black/POC plantation owners. 

Not the least of which: How will this change impact his relationship with Lestat? Particularly when Lestat has the added issue of being described in those articles as having “mind control abilities” and “insistent that he gets what he wants and when facing rejection,” a terrible combination in terms of consent, even in a relationship of the same race, let alone invoking Caucasian/white dominance over Black/POC people, AND Lestat being the catalyst to Louis’ questioning his sexuality:

Lestat is insistent that he gets what he wants and when facing rejection, petulance can quickly turn to ruthless rage which causes frenzied acts of horrifically brutal violence. Lestat also has mind control abilities. Lestat initially infuriates Louis, but this soon turns to fascination which leads Louis to question his religion and sexuality. 

^Screencap reads: "I love how racist everyone is in the damn comments, this doesn’t pervert the story you’re all racist and it’s disgusting. I’m looking forward to it, I hope you keep crying your salty racist tears asswipes."

It makes me question whether Angellus truly believes what they wrote, if this is an ideology, or a troll. I would suggest their use of the term “pervert” is correct though, pervert means: “alter (something) from its original course, meaning, or state to a distortion or corruption of what was first intended.” That’s what this race change does, factually. Although, in this context, “distortion or corruption” carries a negative connotation. It would take a lot to show how this change does not meet the definition or “to pervert,” though.

I hope the rumours of Louis being a brothel owner aren't true

I agree 1,000%, I was hoping that these were just rumors. But, aside from the race change, if this were the only change, I find Louis being a brothel owner to be equivalently morally reprehensible to being a slaver/slave holder/plantation owner/(insert your preferred term). Ideally, they’d change his career to something that doesn’t involve benefiting from the bodies/labor of others in any morally reprehensible manner.

I mean, with a black Louis they can't have him being a slaver anymore, so maybe they're trying to find something that is also morally reprehensible for him to be.

He might still be a slaver. Who knows. Being morally reprehensible as a mortal man didn’t seem to me to be crucial to the story, but they still could have chosen something better. It seems to me like they want a brothel so they can have eye candy for an audience who want to see sex workers, maybe full frontal nudity. 

-----

What also gets my attention is that Anne and Christopher Rice have not yet posted publicly about it, which leads me to believe that this change wasn’t their choice. They take every chance to brag when they’re proud of something, every chance to crowdsource about casting ideas or which VC books Anne’s fans liked best, etc., and in this case, as of Aug. 31, 2021, (and to be fair, maybe I missed it), I haven’t seen either of them post about this on the official VC FB, Anne Rice’s FB, Annerice.com, Christopher Rice’s FB, or christopherricebooks.com. If it had been their choice, I think they would have gladly trumpeted their credit by now, but maybe they’re waiting to do it in a specific venue. Time will tell.

[pop-punklouis]

so im watching euphoria and im on ep 3,, i just watched /the/ scene with louis and harry. i remember it being a huge mess because louis got angry but i have to say, i never saw the scene before so i couldn't understand ... tho now i think it was way too much? dating or not, i wouldn't want people to draw me doing things like that with someone...? i don't know, ive always wondered why people were against louis for this rather than being on his side?

yeah like it was v weird and idk a lot of people were on louis side about it because it felt like bringing something outside of a fandom space into not only the general space but into an entertainment space of a steadily growing and popular television series. people can believe what they want and express that how they want, but i’ve always thought it a bit icky to use a real-life pairing for things like that when there are several ships of fictional characters that could’ve been used like destiel or drarry or stucky etc. as they’re characters and not real people. i’ve been quite solid in my belief that the fourth wall shouldn’t be kicked in on fandom spaces— especially as it comes to using it for teen television fodder. so, like you said, regardless of what the truth is, being uncomfortable about something like that is more than understandable when you weren’t given the heads up about it beforehand, it features a sensitive, personal topic about you, and you find out about it alongside everyone else— even though they don’t have to ask your permission at all to run it. don’t get me wrong, i think the scene in itself is not that bad and it could’ve been much worse, but it’s the principle of it you know? so, louis anger about it was more than valid and most fans and general people sided with him over how he felt.

also, i found it quite strange how some fans automatically jumped to pitting both H and L against one another in this circumstance due to H knowing one of the people who worked on Euphoria— linking that to the idea H must’ve known about it and approved of it while L didn’t which never made much sense to me. H has a steady stream of industry friends that he’s sometimes seen with publicly. the fandom has a way of creating connections and building relationships between those around the boys based solely off the small amount of their friend groups they see. so yes, H was friends with the person from Euphoria. We don’t know the level of that friendship, and being friends with someone does not mean you automatically approve of what they do that might involve you. it’s silly to make sweeping accusations and assumptions about situations like this based on that little info. in my opinion, regardless of their sexuality or relationship status— i see absolutely no one in either of their shoes approving of it and thinking it was fun and cute. so why should we believe H would act otherwise?

[twopoppies]

I mean I didn’t mean it as a criticism, I have no idea about liams acting career I don’t really follow him. As for Louis record deal undoubtedly he will have a much better starting point than an artist coming from scratch to make companies want to hire him.

Harry’s not the most talented actor ever but he is pretty good and as a whole package he has a lot to offer any film, I don’t see it as childish or dumb to acknowledge that maybe their are other factors as to why he gets a role someone else without his advantages might not.

I definitely don’t think he’s a shit person or that he doesn’t deserve good things. He’s earned the basis that has set him up so well undoubtedly.

You probably get more anons about him because more people follow him I guess and he’s been quite controversial in his acting this year definitely. I mean the whole thing with Olivia does suggest, whether fair or not, that Harry’s role in that film might not purely be due to his talent...

(When I said pretty good I didn’t mean that derogatorily I meant on a measure comparative to being the best.)

And can I just say this constant disowning of fans as being fake or not real or ‘fans’ cause they comment on the celebrity they follow (and most celebrities whose careers are due to parents/family links or connections whatever get stick for it it’s not unusual or invalid)In a not solely positive-worship the ground he walks on way, is just weird.

Literally Taylor swift still gets stick for how she got into the music industry...

Did you actually miss the part where I said I wasn’t annoyed at you, but at the double standards this fandom has when it comes to Harry?

I didn’t say it was childish or dumb to acknowledge there are other factors involved in his hiring. Nor did I say you think he’s a shit person. You really missed the point of what I said. I don’t know where your review of his acting skills comes from, given that we’ve barely seen him in anything, but i suppose seeing someone’s talent is subjective.

T*ylor gets shit because she tried to play it off like she was some country bumpkin who just stumbled into a record contracts. That’s why people roll their eyes at her. People with connections who act like “if I can do it, anyone can” are full of shit.

And no one is calling you, or anyone else, a fake fan for not worshipping everything Harry does. If you think that’s what I was saying you didn’t read what I said and you also don’t know much about me or my blog (which is fine), but that’s not the way I operate.

I have no problem with people pointing out his connections etc. — in fact, I pointed them out, myself. What I take issue with is people who make it mean he has no talent and that directors are only using him as advertising and window dressing (neither of which you were doing in uni message, which is why I said my response wasn’t directed at you, but at fandom behavior in general).

But you’re clearly defensive about it because you sent me this message twice. I’m sorry if you felt accused. It wasn’t my intention.

In reference to this post

[brightokyolights]

I just saw your tags on the "harry was oppressed" post. Might elaborate on that when you are not tired? How Zayn was oppressed? His relationship to ot4. Other celebrities? I love your thoughts!

*cracks knuckles* buckle your seat belts folks we’re in for a wild ride here lmao.

also for context *here* is the post this anon is referring to

I think to start off i should just make a little disclaimer, everything i am going to discuss will be based in my biases probably seeing as I am also a brown British Pakistani person who is Muslim. Zayn has been someone that especially when i was younger I looked up to and was very essential in my journey of learning to love and accept myself and my culture tbh. It’s cheesy as hell but it’s true and i think this is important to know before I go into this more because like I said i am definitely biased towards him. Another thing is that I’m just going to be discussing my personal opinions and also my memory is not very good so i will probably miss out a lot of other things that happened/could be discussed. please dont take this as anything more than just. my opinion.

A thing that really opened my eyes to racism and especially the racism in the 1d fandom was the day that zayn left. I dont think thats what the post above was about btw and ill go into that but i kind of just want to talk about this. The day he left was. a severe mess. Not only because it was obviously upsetting but because of all the bs that people were spouting about a situation that absolutely no one had any context on. the statement that was released on facebook gave us nothing. literally just stated that zayn was leaving the band and the accusations and hatred people were directing towards zayn when we didnt know what actually fucking happened (and still dont might i add) was disgusting. people accusing him of being selfish and how they hated him and why he had to ruin everything. Accusing him of using mental illness as an excuse and lying about it and so much more. i had unfollow more than half of the people i followed that day. it really opened my eyes to the fact that these were all thoughts and opinions people had underneath it all and zayn was fine as long as he was part of 1d and giving people what they wanted. which was essentially being the token in the group and once he wasnt providing that anymore? people turned and people turned fast.

i think its also important to point out the flip side of it and that was zayn stans saying that 1d were nothing without 1d etc. i want to talk about why this was different from ot4 stans hating zayn. of course it wasnt nice to see or hear EVERYONE arguing with each other. i hated it so much. but i think what people failed to realise was that when it comes to situations like this you need to look deeper and think about all the nuances of the situation. zayn stans being happy about zayn leaving the band and saying 1d was going to die i did not agree with. anyone who knew me then and knows me now knows that i am a 1d stan regardless (preferably ot5 but i supported 1d until the end even as a 4some) BUT these opinions were rooted in his mistreatment in the band and the racism he was having to face as a result of being in the band etc etc i apologise for not being a person who can better describe and explain this situation but hopefully you are getting the picture. when fans were hating on zayn. with no context with nothing. that was based on racism. point blank. the amount of tweets FROM 1D FANS talking about how he was leaving to join isis and how upset fans were gonna be vulnerable and join etc etc all this deplorable bs. and he had to deal with comments like that throughout his whole time with one direction and i imagine even now. 

Another thing id like to talk about is who zayn stans at least from my point of view usually were. For me i remember when i first got into the fandom i actively made the decision that i didnt want zayn to be my favourite because i didnt want to be a stereotype and this was a point in my life when i still tried to shun and push my culture down because i was ashamed of it. it was only as i slowly saw that zayn was considered as cool and hot and everyone else liked him that i kind of understood that maybe. being brown was alright and it was something cool and that maybe i was cool. it sounds fucked up and honestly i dont even know if i want to be admitting this so adamantly but argh if it helps someone understand then maybe its worth it. (mortifying ordeal of being known eh?) anyways i noticed as i engaged more in fandom and looked for more diversity, more fans like me, majority of non white fans were also... zayn stans. and honestly it makes sense because we all tended to flock towards the closest diversity we could find it seems. im not saying that there werent white zayn stans and that the other boys didnt have non white stans but i just wanted to point out this trend. so when you also take this into account and the fact that on the day zayn left it was majorly... white stans who were criticizing zayn it puts it in perspective for you. majority of fans who still like and support zayn are also not white.

there is a lot more to do with fans but hopefully thats enough of an insight and you can understand the kind of vibes that were present during 1ds prime and what not only zayn had to go through but also as a result the racism we ended up having to deal with as well tbh.

now!!!... something i dont really like talking about lol so this will probably be short but the other boys. so as far as i can remember liams always been kind to zayn since hes left (no surprise there <3 also please correct me if im wrong), niall was kind of indifferent/didnt say anything really, and then there was louis and harry *awkward smile*. hahaha. from my memory i remember when asked about what the most difficult thing was about zayn leaving harry said ‘the paperwork’ which was *awkward smile* and he also kicked that monkey mask/pinata? i cant remember with naughty boys face on it and honestly im sure theres more but his overall reaction to zayn leaving was kind of not caring and maybe being slightly nasty which :) with louis there was the massive twitter fight which literally tears my soul in half so lets not go into that haha and honestly other things where it maybe seemed like he was upset with zayn leaving as well. honestly i am a bit in two minds about these reactions because at the end of the day we dont know what occurred behind the scenes and we probably never will as much as we can speculate or whatever. not to mention that this 10th anniversary it seems maybe everyones on good terms which, who knows really im going to try be optimistic. i think whats important to note about heir reactions is that we dont know anything about their situations but the problem was really how fans reacted tbh (btw i forgot to mention earlier this is about basically everything except for harry and the nb thing. that is inexcusable). the boys reactions were understandable but the problem is that fans of course vicariously are influenced by the boy they stan so when one of them acted a certain way of course that ended up reflecting in fandom and resulted in more racism etc. 

another thing with zayn was that there were many files leaked with like promo or whatever basically describing what kind of role the boys would take on/ their image etc. and of course all the other boys got things like bubbly/funny/charming etc and zayns descriptors? moody, mysterious, dark horse etc etc like from the inception of 1d zayn has been victim to racist stereotypes being pushed on him. and i think this is where harry comes in because of course the image pushed onto him was also extremely harmful and i definitely dont think we should not talk about that but often you'll see that... thats all that is talked about because people are uncomfortable admitting racism and talking about it. 

When i mentioned other celebrities my point was basically just that while ive only talked about zayn in one direction this... is so present among any and every fandom. 5sos, Little Mix, Fifth Harmony... any fandom you can think of, i promise you it is there. racism in fandom is a real thing and a big problem and honestly this is why i always say representation is so important. and when i say that i mean everywhere!!! because if I didnt seek out non white fans to follow then maybe i would’ve had a completely different perspective on all of this.

The thing is also that a lot of this is just stuff that we’ve been able to get our hands on and also fan analysis and theories etc. there is probably so much more to talk bout or go into or stuff we’ll never even know about. I’ve kind of had to make peace with the fact that with celebrities you just really don’t actually know anything about them.

I think i’ll end this here if there’s any more questions you have about anything feel free to ask! and again this is all just my opinion  but hopefully i’ve been able to help answer you <3 have a nice day and i hope youre hydrated!!!

[lordendsavior]

In the latest episode of HBO’s new NSFW teen drama Euphoria, there was sex scene between Harry Styles and Louis Tomlinson. Well, kinda. One of the characters in the show, Kat (played by Barbie Ferreira), is famous online for writing One Direction fan fiction, specifically about Larry Stylinson, the name given to the theory that Styles and Tomlinson were, in fact, lovers. The sex scene in the episode actually comprised of versions of the two former boyband members in an animated scene lifted from one of this character’s stories. It’s unfortunate that the animation left Styles looking a little like Lord Voldemort and Tomlinson like a sweaty teenage boy. 

But while that aspect of the show might not have been real, the conspiracy of Larry Stylinson very much is. Since One Direction were launched off the back of The X Factor in 2010, Tomlinson and Styles have been dogged by rumours that they are embroiled in a love affair. On Tumblr – a breeding ground for fan theories, fan art, fan videos and fan fiction – fans would collect GIFs, images and videos of the pair that “proved” that they were in a relationship. A lingering glance was decoded as a lustful stare, the brush of knees during an interview a sign of a secret intimacy. These in turn would mutate into smutty fan fiction about the pair, where these unspoken sexual wants could play out in full explicit glory.

In the tradition of Bennifer and Brangelina, their names, like their desires, were brought together for the portmaneu Larry Stylinson. Shipping them – the act of wanting two people to be together romantically – became a way of life for some fans. To this day, these fans, known as Larries, are unwavering in their belief, love and support of Larry Stylinson.

The same cannot be said for Louis Tomlinson. For nearly nine years, he has been dogged by rumours and speculation about his relationship with Styles. This latest outing of Larry in Euphoria is just another example of the theory’s pervasiveness. After the scene aired, some fans on Twitter messaged Tomlinson to see if he had been consulted about the scene. His reply was telling. “I can categorically say that I was not contacted nor did I approve it,” he wrote.

For years, Tomlinson has categorically denied that Larry is real. In 2012  he responded to a fan stating that “Larry is the biggest load of b——- I’ve ever heard”, and in a 2017 interview with The Sun, the Doncaster-born singer said that he found the rumours disrespectful of his relationships with women and shared how it had also affected his friendship with Styles. “It took away the vibe you get off anyone. It made everything, I think on both fences, a little bit more unapproachable,” he revealed. “I think it shows that it was never anything real, if I can use that word.”

The decision to include the animated Larry sex scene in Euphoria has provied divisive. On Twitter, One Direction fans have dubbed it “disrespectful”, “vile” and an “embarrassment”. Even self-professed Larries called out the scene and some fans went so far as to start a Change.org petition to have the scene removed from the episode. (At the time of writing it has over nearly 17,000 signatures.)

The fandom’s rejection of Larry, at first, seems hypocritical. How can the very people who have spent years perpetuating the narrative that Tomlinson and Styles are romantically linked show annoyance when that same narrative gets utilised in wider media? However, fandom, specifically fan fiction, is a contradictory and confusing beast. The thing is, Larry Stylinson is bigger than the two boyband members at its core. Their supposed romantic relationship really has nothing to do with them at all.

To give a brief history of fan fiction, the medium, while it always existed in some form, came to prominence in the 1970s in fanzines for the TV show Star Trek. Then known as slash fiction (the slash refers to the forward slash that divide the two characters, for example “Kirk/Spock”), these early writings reexamined scenes within Star Trek episodes where it appeared that there was coded queer behaviour, language or sexual tension. A chance meeting on the bridge of the USS Enterprise could result in steamy sex behind a computer console. A violent clash with a Klingon that left either Spock/Kirk injured, may end with a restorative tryst in a hospital wing.

As fan communities evolved from zines to online forums, so fan fiction became more widely accessible. Forums gave birth to sites like fanfiction.net and archiveofourown.org, where every intellectual property from Harry Potter to Bob the Builder was free game. And not every story written was sexual, either. Many fan fictions, while romantic in nature, kept their plots suitable for all ages. They also mainly took fictional characters and queered formerly heteronormative (or platonic) senarios.

Incorporating of real people – celebrities, public figures, popstars, actors, artists – into these stories propagated during this online boom of fan fanction. Portals like nifty.org had dedicated sections for celebrity fan fiction, while sites like Wattpad, a sort of social media site for writers to share their work, filled with stories about famous people. During One Direction’s imperial phase, Wattpad especially became a hive of 1D fan fiction.

And not all of it was slash fiction, either. Anna Todd’s popular YA novel After, which became a movie this year, had its beginnings as One Direction fan fiction on Wattpad. That story featured a heterosexual relationship. Her literary success follows in the footsteps of EL James, whose Twilight fan fiction was repackaged as 50 Shades of Grey.

Nevertheless, it’s fair to say that much fan fiction, smutty or not, specifically draws on queer narratives. The reasons for this are multi-faceted. Demographically, fan fiction is predominantly written by women. In the case of Spock and Kirk, it has been argued by academics that in queering their relationship, women were able to carve out safe sexual spaces in the world of fiction away from the dominant glare of patriarchal sexuality.

According to fandom academic Camille Bacon-Smith, the fact that the gender of the characters was the same allowed women to reconstruct men without the toxicity of masculinity. The American writer Joanna Russ added to this, suggesting that in this safe space, women were able to explore their fantasies outside the confines of heteropatriarchal normalcy.

In fact, Constance Penley, a professor of Film & Media Studies at the University of California, Santa Barbara, wrote in her book Nasa/Trek Popular Science and Sex in America that the gender of the characters was irrelevant. The act of having characters acknowledge their homosexual desires, she argued, was a metaphorical one, grounded in a desire to change “oppressive sexual roles”.

Still, exploring sexual desire with fictional characters doesn’t feel like an ethical problem. Neither, really, do private fantasies about real people. But fan fiction takes those private fantasies and makes them public. If authors like JK Rowling and Annie Proulx (Brokeback Mountain) take umbrage with fans writing their own stories using their made up characters, how do real people feel about having their lives dissected and fictionalised for entertainment?

The problem is the blurred line between celebrity and the human being. As celebrity’s lives playout on websites, television and physical media, their real life stories – often fabricated for headlines or sales – become a sport. There’s a twisted sense of ownership over these people. The public, as a throbbing and beating entity, made them famous. Their payment is their lives. The boundaries begin to disappear, and these human beings become characters in a soap opera. The internet, which its unending ocean of content, only helps to conjure more moments that fans can decode or adapt for their fics.

The implications of this are different for everyone. Stars like Benedict Cumberbatch and Andrew Scott, who played Sherlock Holmes and Moriarty respectively in the BBC’s cult favourite Sherlock, take the fictionalised versions of their lives in their stride. In an interview with MTV, Cumberbatch, while acknowledging that he found some of the racier stories weird, called it “flattering”. Daniel Radcliff and James McAvoy also seemed to be able to find the humour in it (although, again, acknowledging that they find it “really weird"). There’s also those who just outright ignore that this phenomenon exists.

Harry Styles, despite being one half of Larry Stylinson, has only ever alluded to it once. After the release of his debut solo album, fans speculated that the track Sweet Creature was about Tomlinson. In an interview with a radio station, Styles said: “I think people are always gonna speculate what songs are about, and I don’t think I’d ever want to tell anyone that they’re wrong for feeling what they feel about a song. Even when they’re not necessarily right. But I think if you really listen to the lyrics, I think you can work out if it’s really about that or not, and I would lean towards no.”

However, this level of ambivalence isn’t always easy. In a recent interview with British GQ, Taron Egerton expressed his discomfort with people writing fan fiction about him. “I don’t know why people think I’d want to see that,” he said. “I don’t love it at all.”

It seems that Louis Tomlinson exists firmly in this camp. And unlike these other celebrities, the ship he was involved in evolved into a full blown conspiracy theory. Fans accused management of keeping his and Styles’s relationship a secret. Paparazzi pictures, performances, interviews, press cuttings, tweets and Instagram posts were dissected for clues that the pair were linked. Tomlinson and Styles were bombarded on Twitter by fans, the first comment under every post on social media almost always being “Larry is real”. That level of scrutiny would have been difficult for anyone, but for a teenager progressing into young adulthood it was unbearable.

What’s debatable is whether any of these fans and their libraries of “proof” and “receipts” actually believe that Larry Stylinson is real or whether shipping them is just an extension of their fan fiction fantasies. For the millions of One Direction fans, the members of the group, while clearly real people, were also mythic, so far removed from their realities that they were almost imaginary.

Anyone who has ever truly obsessed over a band or musician can understand that this distance between true human interaction incubates a need to develop an alternative form of intimacy, be it through listening religiously to their music, attending concerts or cooking up fantasies.

And because of the inequalities in knowledge between celebrities and non-celebrities, where we know everything about them and they know nothing about us, these fantasies, and in turn our perceptions of them, become skewered. This mutation is the perfect breeding ground for fan fiction and conspiracy theories as we attempt to fill in the blanks in our intimate knowledge of celebrity lives.

In the case of One Direction, whose fans were mainly young girls and gay boys, this fantasy  became a way to explore their own sexual wants and desires. It’s what the showrunner of Euphoria, Sam Levinson, told The Los Angeles Times he was trying to convey by having the character of Kat write 1D fan fiction.

The fact that the members of that boyband were in a similar age bracket only intensified things. Intimacy and a coarse understanding of celebrity saw the lines between fantasy and reality blur, accelerated and magnified by social media. In a way, it stopped being about Styles or Tomlinson and became about the fans, the community they’d found, a safe space to explore their desires in which those desires were often mirrored and supported by others in their community.

Does all that make real person fan fiction okay? Speaking to i-D, sex psychologist Jess O’Reilly, put it like this: “How might is make someone feel? How would their parents, partner(s), kids or friends feel about reading it? How would they feel if their friends and family read your work? How would you feel if someone published a similar story about you, your child, your partner, your best friend, your sibling or someone else you love?”

For Tomlinson, who has repeatedly shared the impact the sexual speculation had on his relationship with Styles, maybe a line has been crossed. His discomfort with the theories and fan fiction, along with countless other public figures who take issue with it, should be respected.

And, really, in the pantheon of fandoms, Larry Stylinson was its own perfect storm of burgeoning internet cultures, the proliferation of social media and cute boys singing pop bangers. The need to share sexual desires in fan fiction and, by extension, romantic celebrity conspiracy theories, feels more complicated than mere right or wrong, but rather an expanse of grey, ethical ambiguity.

It also feels too late for it to stop, too. Perhaps, as the role and makeup of what constitutes celebrity evolves, accepting fan fiction in its myriad of forms, like with gossip and rumours, is par for the course. Clearly, it’s up to the individual to figure out if they’re okay with that.

[novelwritingtrash]

When Harry Styles played the O2 Arena in 2018, his fans illuminated the cavernous venue in the colours of the LGBTQ Pride flag. Coordinated by a social media account called The Rainbow Project, each seating block was allocated a different colour, so that when Styles played the song Sweet Creature, an enormous rainbow emerged from the crowd. I was there, and it was pretty magical. But it was also emblematic of how Styles’s fanbase views their idol: as a queer icon. 

There’s arguably never been a better time to be an LGBTQ pop star. Acts such as Sam Smith, who came out as non-binary earlier this year, Lil Nas X, the first gay man to have a certified diamond song in America, Halsey, queer boyband Brockhampton, pansexual singer Miley Cyrus and Kim Petras, who is transgender, have all enjoyed an incredible year, bagging the biggest hits of 2019.

Still, when Styles shared Lights Up, the lead single from his forthcoming second solo album Fine Line, there was a collective intake of breath. The song and video - in which he appears shirtless in what looks like a sweaty orgy as both men and women grab at him - was heralded as a “bisexual anthem” by the media and fans on Twitter, despite not really making any explicit or obvious statements about sexuality or the LGBTQ community. Instead, Lights Up was just another example of the queer mythologising that occurs around Harry Styles.

As a member of One Direction, Styles was – aside from Zayn Malik – the group’s most charismatic and enticing member. From his first audition on The X Factor to the band’s disbandment in 2015, the teenager from Cheshire managed to elevate himself and his celebrity swiftly rose to the A list. Helping him along was speculation about his private life: during his tenure in the band he was romantically linked to everyone from Taylor Swift to Kendall Jenner.

But there were two other rumoured relationships that dogged Styles more than the others. The first was his close friendship with radio DJ Nick Grimshaw. Styles and Grimshaw were often photographed together, and there were anodyne showbiz reports about how they even shared a wardrobe. 

Inevitably, rumours suggested they were romantically linked. In fact, so prolific was speculation that during an interview with British GQ, Styles was asked point blank if he was in a relationship with Grimshaw (he denied any romantic relationship) and, in a move that upset many One Direction fans, if he was bisexual. “Bisexual? Me?” he responded.  “I don't think so. I'm pretty sure I'm not.”

The second, and perhaps most complicated of rumours, was that he and fellow bandmate Louis Tomlinson were in a relationship. Larry Stylinson, as their shipname is known, began life as fan-fiction but mutated into a wild conspiracy theory as certain fans – dubbed Larries – documented glances, gestures, touches, interviews, performances and outfits in an attempt to confirm the romance. Even now, four years after the band went on “hiatus”, videos are still being posted on YouTube in an attempt to confirm that their relationship was real.

For Tomlinson, Larry was fandom gone too far. He has repeatedly rejected the conspiracy. Styles, meanwhile, has never publicly discussed it. In fact, unlike Tomlinson, whose post-1D career trajectory has seen him adopt a loutish form of masculinity indebted to the Gallagher brothers, Styles has largely leant into the speculation surrounding his sexuality. Aside from the GQ interview, Styles has told interviewers that gender is not that important to him when it comes to dating. In 2017 he said that he had never felt the need to label his sexuality, adding: “I don’t feel like it’s something I’ve ever felt like I have to explain about myself.”

Likewise, during his time touring with One Direction, and during his own solo tours, the image of Styles draped with a rainbow flag became ubiquitous. He has also donated money from merchandise sales to LGBTQ charities. His fashion sense, too, subverts gender norms: Styles has long sported womenswear, floral prints, dangly earrings and painted nails. 

Nevertheless, Styles’s hesitance to be candid has met with criticism. He has been accused of queer-baiting - or enjoying the benefits of appealing to an LGBTQ fanbase without having any of the difficulties. I’ve written before about how queer artists, who now enjoy greater visibility and are finding mainstream success, have struggled commercially owing to their sexuality or gender identity. 

Styles, who is assumed to be a cisgender, heterosexual male, doesn’t carry any of the commercial risk laden upon Troye Sivan, Years and Years or MNEK, who all use same-gender pronouns in their music and are explicitly gay in their videos. His music – with its nods to rock’n’roll, Americana and folk ­– doesn’t feel very queer, either. Looking at it this way, the queer idolisation of Harry Styles doesn’t feel deserved.

“The thing with Harry Styles is that he often does the bare minimum and gets an out-sized load of credit for it,” says songwriter and record label manager Grace Medford. For Medford, who has worked at Syco and is now part of the team at Xenomania records, Styles’s queer narrative has been projected on him by the media and his fans. “I don't think that he queer-baits, but I don't think he does anywhere near enough to get the response that he does.”

Of course, Styles does not need to explain or be specific about his sexuality. As Medford puts it: “he's well within his rights to live his life how he chooses.” However, he has also created a space for himself in pop that allows him that ambiguity.

It’s a privilege few pop stars have. Last year, Rita Ora was hit with criticism after her song Girls, a collaboration with Charli XCX, Cardi B and Bebe Rexha, was dubbed problematic and accused of performative bisexuality. Even though Ora explicitly sang the lyric “I'm 50-50 and I'm never gonna hide it”, she was lambasted by social media critics, media commentary and even her fellow artists until she was forced to publicly confirm her bisexuality.

But the same was not done to Styles when he performed unreleased song “Medicine” during his world tour. The lyrics have never been confirmed, but the song is said to contain the line: “The boys and the girls are in/ I mess around with him/ And I'm okay with it.” Instead of probing him for clarity or accusing him of performativity, the song was labelled a “bisexual anthem” and praised as “a breakthrough for bisexual music fans”.

Of course, there’s misogyny inherent to such reactions. But there’s also something more layered and complex at play, too. “There's such a dearth of queer people to look up to, especially people at Harry’s level,” posits Medford. “With somebody who is seen as cool and credible and attractive as Harry, part of it is wishful thinking, I think. 

“The fact is, he was put together into a boyband on a television show by a Pussycat Doll. And he has rebranded as Mick Jagger’s spiritual successor and sings with Stevie Nicks; he's really done the work there. Part of him doing that work is him stepping back and letting other people create a story for him.”

One only has to look at how Styles’ celebrity manifests itself (cool, fashionable, artistic) in comparison to that of his former bandmates. Liam Payne (this week dubbed by the tabloids as a chart failure) has been a tabloid fixture since his public relationship with Cheryl Cole and relies on countless interviews, photoshoots and even an advertising campaign for Hugo Boss to maintain his fame. 

Styles, meanwhile, doesn’t really engage with social media. He also rarely appears in public and carefully chooses what kind of press he does, actively limiting the number of interviews he gives. Styles’s reticence to engage with the media and general public – perhaps a form of self-preservation – has awarded him a rare mystique that few people in the public eye possess. 

This enigmatic personal, along with his sexual ambiguity, his support of LGBTQ charities and his gender-fluid approach to fashion, creates the perfect incubation for queer fandom. It also provides a shield against serious accusations of queer-baiting. As Medford argues: “Harry's queer mythology has been presented to and bestowed upon him by queer people whereas other acts feel like they have to actively seek that out.”

Ultimately, the way that Styles navigates his queer fandom doesn’t feel calculated or contrived. For Eli, an 18-year-old from Orlando who grew up with One Direction, seeing Styles “grow into himself” has been important. He suggests that Styles’ queer accessibility has helped to create a safe space for fans. “Watching him on tour dance on stage every night in his frilly outfits, singing about liking boys and girls, waving around pride flags, and even helping a fan come out to her mom, really helped me come to terms with my own sexuality,” he explains.

Vicky, who is 25 and from London, agrees: “To be able to attend his show with my pansexual flag and wave it around and feel so much love and respect - it's an amazing feeling. I'm aware so many queer people can't experience it so I'm very grateful Harry creates these safe spaces through his music and concerts.”

There’s appeal in Styles’s ambiguity, too. Summer Shaud, from Boston, says that Styles’ “giving no f----” approach to sexuality and gender is “inspiring and affirming” for those people who are coming to terms with their own identities or those who live in the middle of sexuality or gender spectrums. “There’s enormous pressure from certain gatekeeping voices within the queer community to perform queerness in an approved, unambiguous way, often coming from people with no substantive understanding of bisexuality or genderfluidity who are still looking to put everyone into a box,” she argues. “Harry’s gender presentation, queer-coding, and refusal to label himself are a defiant rebuke of that “You’re Not Doing It Right” attitude, and that resonates so strongly with queers who aren’t exclusively homosexual or exclusively binary.”

Shaud says that the queer community that has congregated around Styles is another reason she’s so drawn to him. “Seeing how his last tour was such an incredible site of affirmation and belonging for queers is deeply moving to me, and as older queer [Shaud is 41] I’m so grateful that all the young people growing up together with Harry have someone like him to provide that.” 

In fact, she argues that there’s a symbiotic relationship between Styles and his queer fans. She cites an interview he gave to Rolling Stone this year in which he said how transformative the tour was for him. “For me the tour was the biggest thing in terms of being more accepting of myself, I think,” Styles shared. “I kept thinking, 'Oh wow, they really want me to be myself. And be out and do it.’”

All of the queer Harry Styles fans I spoke to agreed that it really didn’t matter whether their idol was explicit about his sexuality or not. “It’s weird that people scrutinise people who don’t label [their sexuality] when they have no idea what that person feels like inside or, in Harry’s case, what it’s like to be under the public eye,” argues Valerie, who is 18. “It's an individual choice, not ours,” agrees Vicky.

Ollie, 22 and from Brighton, takes a more rounded view, however: “On one hand, I think that quite simply it isn’t any of anyone else’s business. On the other, if you place yourself in the public eye to the level of fame that he has then you should be prepared to be probed about every minute detail of your personal life, whether you like it or not – you should at least be prepared to be questioned about it.” Still, he says that the good that Styles does is what’s important: “He brings fantastic support and attention to the community, whether he is actively a part of it or not.”

Arguably, the ambiguity and mystery that surrounds Styles only allows more space for queer people to find safety in him and in the fandom.

Still, if fans are expecting a queer coming of age with new album Fine Line, they will be disappointed. Lyrically, he doesn’t venture into new territory, although there are some new musical flares. He also seems like he’s started to distance himself a little from the ambiguity, too. “I’m aware that as a white male, I don’t go through the same things as a lot of the people that come to the shows,” he told Rolling Stone. “I can’t claim that I know what it’s like, because I don’t. So I’m not trying to say, ‘I understand what it’s like.’ I’m just trying to make people feel included and seen.” Having said that, within weeks Styles appeared on Saturday Night Live playing a gay social media manager, using queer slang and even wearing an S&M harness.

And so the cycle of queer mythologising continues, and is likely to continue for the rest of Styles’s career. And maybe things will change and maybe they won’t.

“If you are black, if you are white, if you are gay, if you are straight, if you are transgender — whoever you are, whoever you want to be, I support you,” he said earlier this year. “I love every single one of you.” In a world where LGBTQ rights are threatened and there’s socio-political insecurity, perhaps, for now at least, that’s enough.

[accidentalharrie]

maybe you or one of you followers has access to the telegraph article about Harry "Why does the world want Harry Styles to be gay" I don't know what to think about this headline and I really want to read it but its online only for subscribers

Here you go, Nons. (I hesitate to post this but…)

When Harry Styles played the O2 Arena in 2018, his fans illuminated the cavernous venue in the colours of the LGBTQ Pride flag. Coordinated by a social media account called The Rainbow Project, each seating block was allocated a different colour, so that when Styles played the song Sweet Creature, an enormous rainbow emerged from the crowd. I was there, and it was pretty magical. But it was also emblematic of how Styles’s fanbase views their idol: as a queer icon.

There’s arguably never been a better time to be an LGBTQ pop star. Acts such as Sam Smith, who came out as non-binary earlier this year, Lil Nas X, the first gay man to have a certified diamond song in America, Halsey, queer boyband Brockhampton, pansexual singer Miley Cyrus and Kim Petras, who is transgender, have all enjoyed an incredible year, bagging the biggest hits of 2019.

Still, when Styles shared Lights Up, the lead single from his forthcoming second solo album Fine Line, there was a collective intake of breath. The song and video - in which he appears shirtless in what looks like a sweaty orgy as both men and women grab at him - was heralded as a “bisexual anthem” by the media and fans on Twitter, despite not really making any explicit or obvious statements about sexuality or the LGBTQ community. Instead, Lights Up was just another example of the queer mythologising that occurs around Harry Styles.

As a member of One Direction, Styles was – aside from Zayn Malik – the group’s most charismatic and enticing member. From his first audition on The X Factor to the band’s disbandment in 2015, the teenager from Cheshire managed to elevate himself and his celebrity swiftly rose to the A list. Helping him along was speculation about his private life: during his tenure in the band he was romantically linked to everyone from Taylor Swift to Kendall Jenner.

But there were two other rumoured relationships that dogged Styles more than the others. The first was his close friendship with radio DJ Nick Grimshaw. Styles and Grimshaw were often photographed together, and there were anodyne showbiz reports about how they even shared a wardrobe.

Inevitably, rumours suggested they were romantically linked. In fact, so prolific was speculation that during an interview with British GQ, Styles was asked point blank if he was in a relationship with Grimshaw (he denied any romantic relationship) and, in a move that upset many One Direction fans, if he was bisexual. “Bisexual? Me?” he responded.  “I don’t think so. I’m pretty sure I’m not.”

The second, and perhaps most complicated of rumours, was that he and fellow bandmate Louis Tomlinson were in a relationship. Larry Stylinson, as their shipname is known, began life as fan-fiction but mutated into a wild conspiracy theory as certain fans – dubbed Larries – documented glances, gestures, touches, interviews, performances and outfits in an attempt to confirm the romance. Even now, four years after the band went on “hiatus”, videos are still being posted on YouTube in an attempt to confirm that their relationship was real.

For Tomlinson, Larry was fandom gone too far. He has repeatedly rejected the conspiracy. Styles, meanwhile, has never publicly discussed it. In fact, unlike Tomlinson, whose post-1D career trajectory has seen him adopt a loutish form of masculinity indebted to the Gallagher brothers, Styles has largely leant into the speculation surrounding his sexuality. Aside from the GQ interview, Styles has told interviewers that gender is not that important to him when it comes to dating. In 2017 he said that he had never felt the need to label his sexuality, adding: “I don’t feel like it’s something I’ve ever felt like I have to explain about myself.”

Likewise, during his time touring with One Direction, and during his own solo tours, the image of Styles draped with a rainbow flag became ubiquitous. He has also donated money from merchandise sales to LGBTQ charities. His fashion sense, too, subverts gender norms: Styles has long sported womenswear, floral prints, dangly earrings and painted nails.

Nevertheless, Styles’s hesitance to be candid has met with criticism. He has been accused of queer-baiting - or enjoying the benefits of appealing to an LGBTQ fanbase without having any of the difficulties. I’ve written before about how queer artists, who now enjoy greater visibility and are finding mainstream success, have struggled commercially owing to their sexuality or gender identity.

Styles, who is assumed to be a cisgender, heterosexual male, doesn’t carry any of the commercial risk laden upon Troye Sivan, Years and Years or MNEK, who all use same-gender pronouns in their music and are explicitly gay in their videos. His music – with its nods to rock’n’roll, Americana and folk ­– doesn’t feel very queer, either. Looking at it this way, the queer idolisation of Harry Styles doesn’t feel deserved.

“The thing with Harry Styles is that he often does the bare minimum and gets an out-sized load of credit for it,” says songwriter and record label manager Grace Medford. For Medford, who has worked at Syco and is now part of the team at Xenomania records, Styles’s queer narrative has been projected on him by the media and his fans. “I don’t think that he queer-baits, but I don’t think he does anywhere near enough to get the response that he does.”

Of course, Styles does not need to explain or be specific about his sexuality. As Medford puts it: “he’s well within his rights to live his life how he chooses.” However, he has also created a space for himself in pop that allows him that ambiguity.

It’s a privilege few pop stars have. Last year, Rita Ora was hit with criticism after her song Girls, a collaboration with Charli XCX, Cardi B and Bebe Rexha, was dubbed problematic and accused of performative bisexuality. Even though Ora explicitly sang the lyric “I’m 50-50 and I’m never gonna hide it”, she was lambasted by social media critics, media commentary and even her fellow artists until she was forced to publicly confirm her bisexuality.

But the same was not done to Styles when he performed unreleased song “Medicine” during his world tour. The lyrics have never been confirmed, but the song is said to contain the line: “The boys and the girls are in/ I mess around with him/ And I’m okay with it.” Instead of probing him for clarity or accusing him of performativity, the song was labelled a “bisexual anthem” and praised as “a breakthrough for bisexual music fans”.

Of course, there’s misogyny inherent to such reactions. But there’s also something more layered and complex at play, too. “There’s such a dearth of queer people to look up to, especially people at Harry’s level,” posits Medford. “With somebody who is seen as cool and credible and attractive as Harry, part of it is wishful thinking, I think.

“The fact is, he was put together into a boyband on a television show by a Pussycat Doll. And he has rebranded as Mick Jagger’s spiritual successor and sings with Stevie Nicks; he’s really done the work there. Part of him doing that work is him stepping back and letting other people create a story for him.”

One only has to look at how Styles’ celebrity manifests itself (cool, fashionable, artistic) in comparison to that of his former bandmates. Liam Payne (this week dubbed by the tabloids as a chart failure) has been a tabloid fixture since his public relationship with Cheryl Cole and relies on countless interviews, photoshoots and even an advertising campaign for Hugo Boss to maintain his fame.

Styles, meanwhile, doesn’t really engage with social media. He also rarely appears in public and carefully chooses what kind of press he does, actively limiting the number of interviews he gives. Styles’s reticence to engage with the media and general public – perhaps a form of self-preservation – has awarded him a rare mystique that few people in the public eye possess.

This enigmatic personal, along with his sexual ambiguity, his support of LGBTQ charities and his gender-fluid approach to fashion, creates the perfect incubation for queer fandom. It also provides a shield against serious accusations of queer-baiting. As Medford argues: “Harry’s queer mythology has been presented to and bestowed upon him by queer people whereas other acts feel like they have to actively seek that out.”

Ultimately, the way that Styles navigates his queer fandom doesn’t feel calculated or contrived. For Eli, an 18-year-old from Orlando who grew up with One Direction, seeing Styles “grow into himself” has been important. He suggests that Styles’ queer accessibility has helped to create a safe space for fans. “Watching him on tour dance on stage every night in his frilly outfits, singing about liking boys and girls, waving around pride flags, and even helping a fan come out to her mom, really helped me come to terms with my own sexuality,” he explains.

Vicky, who is 25 and from London, agrees: “To be able to attend his show with my pansexual flag and wave it around and feel so much love and respect - it’s an amazing feeling. I’m aware so many queer people can’t experience it so I’m very grateful Harry creates these safe spaces through his music and concerts.”

There’s appeal in Styles’s ambiguity, too. Summer Shaud, from Boston, says that Styles’ “giving no f—-” approach to sexuality and gender is “inspiring and affirming” for those people who are coming to terms with their own identities or those who live in the middle of sexuality or gender spectrums. “There’s enormous pressure from certain gatekeeping voices within the queer community to perform queerness in an approved, unambiguous way, often coming from people with no substantive understanding of bisexuality or genderfluidity who are still looking to put everyone into a box,” she argues. “Harry’s gender presentation, queer-coding, and refusal to label himself are a defiant rebuke of that “You’re Not Doing It Right” attitude, and that resonates so strongly with queers who aren’t exclusively homosexual or exclusively binary.”

Shaud says that the queer community that has congregated around Styles is another reason she’s so drawn to him. “Seeing how his last tour was such an incredible site of affirmation and belonging for queers is deeply moving to me, and as older queer [Shaud is 41] I’m so grateful that all the young people growing up together with Harry have someone like him to provide that.”

In fact, she argues that there’s a symbiotic relationship between Styles and his queer fans. She cites an interview he gave to Rolling Stone this year in which he said how transformative the tour was for him. “For me the tour was the biggest thing in terms of being more accepting of myself, I think,” Styles shared. “I kept thinking, ‘Oh wow, they really want me to be myself. And be out and do it.’”

All of the queer Harry Styles fans I spoke to agreed that it really didn’t matter whether their idol was explicit about his sexuality or not. “It’s weird that people scrutinise people who don’t label [their sexuality] when they have no idea what that person feels like inside or, in Harry’s case, what it’s like to be under the public eye,” argues Valerie, who is 18. “It’s an individual choice, not ours,” agrees Vicky.

Ollie, 22 and from Brighton, takes a more rounded view, however: “On one hand, I think that quite simply it isn’t any of anyone else’s business. On the other, if you place yourself in the public eye to the level of fame that he has then you should be prepared to be probed about every minute detail of your personal life, whether you like it or not – you should at least be prepared to be questioned about it.” Still, he says that the good that Styles does is what’s important: “He brings fantastic support and attention to the community, whether he is actively a part of it or not.”

Arguably, the ambiguity and mystery that surrounds Styles only allows more space for queer people to find safety in him and in the fandom.

Still, if fans are expecting a queer coming of age with new album Fine Line, they will be disappointed. Lyrically, he doesn’t venture into new territory, although there are some new musical flares. He also seems like he’s started to distance himself a little from the ambiguity, too. “I’m aware that as a white male, I don’t go through the same things as a lot of the people that come to the shows,” he told Rolling Stone. “I can’t claim that I know what it’s like, because I don’t. So I’m not trying to say, ‘I understand what it’s like.’ I’m just trying to make people feel included and seen.” Having said that, within weeks Styles appeared on Saturday Night Live playing a gay social media manager, using queer slang and even wearing an S&M harness.

And so the cycle of queer mythologising continues, and is likely to continue for the rest of Styles’s career. And maybe things will change and maybe they won’t.

“If you are black, if you are white, if you are gay, if you are straight, if you are transgender — whoever you are, whoever you want to be, I support you,” he said earlier this year. “I love every single one of you.” In a world where LGBTQ rights are threatened and there’s socio-political insecurity, perhaps, for now at least, that’s enough.

[ssfoc]

You seem pretty reasonable and I don't get why you are so sure they are still together. In the fandom the dominant thought is: believe it until proven otherwise. I don't understand this kind of leap of faith, it seems just a way to rest attached on something people don't want to let go because they have invested so much in it emotionally. I think it's better to face reality than living in a lie and whishful thinking. Btw I really like your blog

Thank you. I have no proof, I generally don’t believe in receipts.

There aren’t very many things I’m certain about, but I can observe patterns of behavior. Louis has been MIA for so long. The few times this year that he has been papped (and the MRL video segments) he has looked thin and less than well.

Louis’ career is obviously a big question mark. Harry has been traveling globally. They haven’t been photographed together since December 2015. Other than Louis’ birthday tweet to Harry in 2017, there has been no evidence of direct contact.

Their families are in contact, however. Anne still cares about Louis, going by her Miss You Facebook icon frame. Lottie and Gemma are friends, at least on social media. There are hidden layers we only glimpse at. Harry’s band members follow Louis’ band members, and Adam’s wife follows Lottie (they mutually know Lou Teasdale). Lottie has spent time with Harry Lambert and Antonio Pignone. Louis’ collaborators seem to know enough about HL. Steve made the JHO mv with a million Larry references and scrolled back on Harry’s Instagram to “like” his rainbow post. Bebe knows about Harry but not Eleanor. And she doesn’t know Niall or Liam.

They follow each other around the world, even when there’s no obvious agenda. I don’t have details of their travel plans, but they do seem to turn up together. Stalkers are often instructed to post photos showing they are apart (they do have a function), but many times we find out that the photos are purposely misdated. The last one of those photos placed Louis in Amsterdam on 12/27/17, when we know he probably left to return to the UK on 12/23 and flew to LA shortly afterward, where Harry was. Why do they follow each other around for no reason? Why would they try to hide it?

Why is Dan W. so obsessed by Larry? Why is he so obsessed by Louis’ baby? Why is he obsessed by RBB? It’s creepy and psychotic, if there’s nothing there. They’re innocent tour mascots, aren’t they? So what if fans are obsessed about them— Dan has already established that Larries are crazy, unreliable tinhatters. Giving Larries free PR seems even more desperate and paranoid. He acts very pressed about two band members potentially in a relationship together, to the point of seeming personally invested.

Then there are the many, many things that HL do that are totally unnecessary, but they do it anyway.

• The H’s on the ground at Louis’ Royal Variety Performance • The shushing and pausing before Louis’ solos— up to 28 seconds— during IICF • IICF and SC together • The recurring interlocked green and blue rings in the MY mv • The “Styles” graffiti in the MY mv

These are only the most obvious things. Other things, like Harry’s bee tattoo, his Vans, his Adidas, the many yellow and black outfits (including H’s backstage suit at the XF), Louis’ bee jacket at the iTunes performance, the blue and green spot lights at Louis’ XF performance, Louis’ arriving in a shipping container at the RV performance, the blue lights running along the walkway to the B stage, the graphics in H’s shows, BTY being played at H’s VIP lounge, H drawing RBB’s features on a stuffed animal gift, L wearing rose t-shirts, H and L both wearing lightning designs in their clothing, H mentioning that his fav performer was Freddie Mercury (Freddie Reign)… these can all be circumstantial and coincidental. In contrast, the list I pointed out above take noticeable deliberation and action.

People have accused Harry and Louis of baiting Larries for PR. Their official PR have certainly tried everything to deny a relationship, to the point that Larries who support both of them seem to have left in droves, and the ones who stay have become a tiny part of the fandom. It’s very hard to find a Harrie Larrie these days. I don’t know if it’s even worth the bother to appeal to this tiny fanbase.

I can be certainly be wrong, and I would accept it— and though I have invested emotionally in HL, that wouldn’t drive me to believe something that my guts tell me is false. A friend captured it in a nice, simple rule of thumb, 1. Louis isn’t straight, 2. Harry isn’t straight, 3. They act like a couple.

Addendum: Fast forward a couple of years, and all of this has fallen away. They do not travel to follow each other— in fact, they stay as far away from each other as possible. Harry’s traveling to Japan for an extended period of time in Dec 2018 was literally the other side of the world. They have written obvious breakup albums that Louus and Harry themselves call breakup albums. The only references to HL are the equivalent of autobiographical memories (when referring to the past, as in Louis’ songs) or outright larrybaiting (when referring to the present, as Harry often does). They broke up. It’s not a nice breakup. The relationship was incredibly toxic in parts. The toxicity and pettiness are current and active, as of 4 November 2020.

[dogsliampaynedoesntinstagram]

Something I've noticed about the off-base accusatory anons people get is there's generally a pattern when it comes to Louis and Harry. If you talk about Louis's career- you're going to get an anon lambasting you for not believing everything is terrible. If you talk about Harry's brand/politics- you're going to get an anon accusing you of hating Harry and saying that he's disingenuous. Those seem to be the pressure points of the angry anons.

I think that’s a really good point - anon. It seems that there are certain topics that are sensitive in a very particular way - and trigger a ‘if you say anything I disagree with then I will define your views for you’ - particularly from anons, but also in fandom more widely.

When it comes to people who say I hate Harry - I kind of get it. I think it’s awful policing to define any kind of criticism or non-positive reaction as hate.  And I get super frustrated when people suggest I only criticise things Harry does because I hate him, when it should be abundantly clear that I have a well devleoped world view.  I didn’t just wake up on the morning of 5 April 2018 and decide then that redefining Martin Luther King’s legacy to ‘niceness’ is a fundamentally harmful act. But I am consistently critical of non-minor aspects of Harry’s art and how he presents himself. 

For a long time I didn’t get that many anons suggesting I hate Louis and only care about Harry, and I think it’s because I didn’t talk that much about his career. The things that annoy me most in fandom discourse about Louis are snobbery and class-hatred and the erasure of Jay’s death (the irony here of course is that lots of people trash Louis’ presentation and pretend it’s because they’re fans).  

My position with Louis’ career is basically ‘we don’t know what’s going on and it might be good’. And it’s only been recently that saying that has attracted ragey anons who pay attention to details of who I reblog, but clearly don’t understand a word I’ve written.  

What is frustrating for me is that I find most fandom discourse about Louis’ career fundamnetally incompatible with my worldview (‘Louis Tomlinson makes his own history, but not in circumstances of his own choosing’). I think that a contextless ‘maybe he doesn’t want to make music’ is as inane as a contextless ‘he’s being sabotaged’.  I am also fundamentally opposed to arguments that are resting on the idea that suggesting someone is a victim of the power structures of capitalism is saying something bad about them.  

And what I find frustrating about the angry anons is that they’re ignoring everythign I say and placing me within an argument where I disagree with the terms and pretty much what everyone is saying.

[lrambling]

I’m not a natural grudge holder, and I’ve always talked about how easy it is to get sucked into Larrie and how hard it is to escape and the importance of showing understanding towards ex-larries who manage to leave and show a true grasp of what they did that was wrong. But what do you do when the person leaving is one of the people who made it so easy to get sucked in and so difficult to leave?

I think redemption and forgiveness are pretty personal subjects, I don’t think you can apply strict rules or standards. But emmie aka worshippedlove aka iftheresnolove aka thatsactuallystarlight made an explanation post about her time as a larrie that provides an interesting starting point to think about these things.

Before I put more detailed thoughts below a cut, let me say that I am happy for Emmie. She confirms how unhealthy the Larrie community is, and what an unhealthy entrance into the LGBTQ+ community it is, and I hope a much happier online (and offline) life is ahead for her. I hope she is telling the truth when she says she won’t repeat her actions in a future fandom. I think she has done some of the hard work of acknowledging her past behavior and is in a much better position to continue in fandom safely than people who just slip away from Larrie and start over again somewhere else. But I am still not fully confident that she has a complete grasp of what made her behavior so harmful. I do not think she acknowledges the full extent of both the manipulativeness and invasiveness of her posts as a Larrie.

It seems like in the first 20 or so questions, she’s addressing concerns from non-Larries, and in the last part, she’s addressing accusations that seem to come from other Larries about behavior they didn’t like from her when she was a Larrie. The first part has a lot to like from the perspective of evaluating whether someone is “redeemed”, understands what they did wrong, and is unlikely to do it again. She acknowledges that the theorizing and tumblr posts can encourage people to harass, there’s an understanding of the importance of accepting people’s identities, and a grasp of how inaccurate and deception-based the larrie perspective was. She understands how much she was lying to herself and doesn’t seem to cling to many larrie illusions.

However, in the second part particularly, when she talks more about other larries, I think she does excuse and minimize her actions to a certain extent. She tends to emphasize “look how much worse these other larries are,” which tbh is absolutely true. But it doesn’t make her actions ok. She’s very concerned about distinguishing her behavior from “actual stalking” without fully acknowledging how incredibly invasive it actually was.

I summed up a lot of my problems with her larrie blogging in this post. You’ll note that my concerns are not based on the things she says she’s falsely accused of (I think mostly she’s responding to accusations from other larries but I still wanted to point this out). I acknowledge that she’s not as virulently hateful or misogynist as many larries. I don’t make shit up about what she’s done, I don’t even accuse her of being a liar. Often, when I talk about Larrie manipulators, I point out that they can either be lying to their followers, or lying to themselves. Emmie confirms, if you choose to believe her, that she was lying to herself. 

But not being an outright liar, not being guilty of everything she’s been accused of, doesn’t mean that being “extra” is the worst thing she did. What Emmie did, over and over, was present speculation as fact and guesses as knowledge. This is perhaps the most harmful behavior she exhibited. And I don’t say that to minimize her actions as a Larrie. This is INCREDIBLY harmful and dangerous behavior. This is what allows anti-vaxxers and climate change deniers to speak with confidence and then convince others. If someone WANTS to believe something, and they’re told they’re correct in an authoritative manner, then it gives them an excuse.

Emmie acknowledges this behavior to an extent:

“So I found myself having the urge to (also constantly) put those thoughts down in writing to make them go away and filled all the (little and big) doubts with reassurances: circumstantial “evidence”, social media interactions that painted the picture I wanted to see, reaching (a lot of reaching), timelines that proved nothing but made me feel better. I ignored a lot of “evidence” that proved me wrong as well, and that’s how I kept myself afloat.”

But it’s the presentation of that circumstantial evidence that makes this so particularly harmful. She presented analysis and assumption as fact. And presented those facts in a way that suggested her knowledge as a journalist or someone with insider info made her conclusions authoritative and reliable.

I always got particularly frustrated by Emmie’s posts, and blogged about her a lot (as you can tell from all the links in that summary post which I’m linking to again just because this has gotten so long - btw if you want to read deleted posts, sometimes you can google “worshippedlove” and the portion of the text visible in the link and find a reblog). I always felt that she was smart enough that she should have been able to recognize what she was doing. I felt that she was too smart to be writing confidently about Cristiano Ronaldo and his manager being in a relationship when she clearly didn’t even know enough about his life to even keep track of who gay tabloid rumors were supposed to be about.

And I think she does get at why she pretended to have this confidence when she talks about how she was trying to silence her own doubts, something I’ve often assumed about many of the more aggressive “theorizing” larries. But the post doesn’t indicate that she’s confronted just how manipulative and harmful and dangerous this is. This is lying. Acting as if you know something when you don’t, acting as if you have good reason to believe something when you don’t - this is lying. And the danger of false claims to knowledge are particularly relevant now, in this age of conspiracy theorist thinking.

There is one additional piece of troublesome behavior that she doesn’t address in her post. She presents herself as uncomfortable discussing Jay’s passing, and I believe her. But less than 2 weeks after Jay died, she made a post in which she tried to analyze and justify why Louis would perform a tribute to his mother on Simon Cowell’s tv show. 

She deleted the post quickly, and because it was under a cut, we can’t tell what was said from reblogs of it. So we can only guess at the contents by anti responses such as this: “a post using this time in Louis’s life as data points to explain why he would, according to Larries, allow Simon Cowell to profit off the song he wrote in honor of Jay. Without rethinking any of their theories about what a terrible person Simon is, and without ever thinking that maybe they just don’t know what is happening in Louis’s life or how he feels and they should STOP. ANALYZING. IT.” There’s some other mentions here and I believe here.

I mention this because it shows the way being a larrie can normalize, encourage, or even require invasive behavior, even against someone’s better instincts. Emmie was clearly uncomfortable with the post from the start, and in her memory of her behavior, she has remembered herself as someone who didn’t talk about Jay’s death. But actually, she was the author of a post with 400 notes that helped people justify continuing to believe that Louis was engaging in stunts during and after the death of his mother.

What does any of this mean in terms of how we as a fandom should treat Emmie or anyone else in her position? I don’t know what to say, beyond that obviously I would hope people won’t be assholes, won’t harass her about her Larrie past. I don’t think there’s an onus on anyone to make a space for her in the fandom and I absolutely understand if people don’t trust her, but i also don’t think there’s necessarily a need to be constantly warning people away from her. I don’t know. *shrug*

[youngandmadeoflightning-blog]

Me and my dad. Harry and Robin. Louis and Jay.

Alternatively titled: Fuck you, cancer.

The universe is really, really fucking cruel sometimes. We all know this. Spouses get abused or cheated on. Parents have to bury their children before they’ve really had a chance to live. And sometimes, children have to bury their parents, too.

My dad died from leukemia on June 17, 1999. He was 37. It was 2 days after my 7th birthday, and my sisters were 10 and 11. Like Jay, his cancer went incredibly fast; he’d only been diagnosed 10 months before. I’d been raised in the church, but being in the south, it was more of a ritual than anything, so that day, when I woke up to find out that my dad, my hero, was gone, I decided that the whole thing was crap and became very bitter and jaded. Yes, even at that age. I was seven, but I’d already lost my child-like idealism. I learned that the world wasn’t always as safe and good of a place as I had thought it was.

My birthday was tinged with sadness for several years because of the timing of the anniversary, and adding Father’s Day on top of it was like a kick to the stomach. I didn’t like to talk about him; anytime someone told me how I reminded them of my dad, I wanted to throw up. My sisters remember a lot about him, but I don’t because of how young I was when he got sick. The memories I do have are more like photographs in the back of my mind.

It eventually got easier to talk about and hear about. (Otherwise, I wouldn’t be writing this post.) But for those of you who have been lucky enough not to lose someone this close to you, let me just say that it’s a pain that never completely goes away. You just learn to deal with it. You get used to life without that person that used to be such an integral part of your world. But there are things that will come up, even a decade and a half later, that tear back open the scars that you’d thought were long healed. For me, Louis and Harry losing Jay and Robin were two of those things.

I had a dream last night, that I was having dinner with Louis, Harry, my dad, Jay, and Robin. Louis, Harry, and I were on one side of the table, with our respective parents sitting across from us. At one point, I was catching my dad up on everything that had happened in my life since he died, and he just smiled and said, “I know, sweet pea (his nickname for me). I’ve been watching over you the whole time.” Then, Jay and Robin looked at Louis and Harry, and Jay said, “And we’re going to be watching over you boys, too.” Robin added, “You’re not alone, ever.” Harry suddenly got very solemn and put his head on Louis’ shoulder, who wrapped his arm around me, and Jay said, “Take care of each other, yeah?” Louis nodded and replied, “I’ve got them.” And then I woke up.

Sobbing.

Grief is fucking hard. And it is one of the most personal things in the world. I wouldn’t dare to assume what these boys are feeling right now, or what they felt six months ago, but what I can tell you is that it can be all-consuming, and sometimes you just have to find a way to make it through the waves no matter what it takes. Whether it means being cheeky interacting with fans on Twitter like Louis did last week, or completely staying off the radar like Harry has, you have to do what you need to survive. And I got so angry seeing people accuse Louis of not caring about Robin last week (ask Amanda, I went off in her ask box, and she was nice enough not to post it), because unless someone tells you themselves what they are feeling and how someone’s death is affecting them, you don’t know. It’s that simple. You. Don’t. Know. And you sure as hell don’t get to judge them for it. What we do know is that Robin loved Harry and Gemma like his own, and that he considered Louis, Liam, Niall, and Zayn family from the very beginning. What can we assume from that? That Harry is devastated, and that Louis is heartbroken, too, even if in a different way. Even if Louis and Harry were just friends, he knows exactly what his friend/bandmate/brother was walking through because he just lived it. I can tell you from personal experience that it makes your grief raw all over again. Six months is no time at all in situations like this.

I wish I could be a support to these boys and their families, but I’m thankful that their lives are so full of love. I know that Louis, Lottie, Fizzy, Daisy, and Phoebe will make sure that Doris and Ernest grow up with tons of stories about just how incredible their mum was. I know that Harry, our strong, brave, beautiful boy, and Gemma will help carry Anne through the grief of losing her love. I know that Niall and Liam, even from afar, will be there for their brothers whenever they are needed.

I lost my dad 18 years, 10 days, and approximately 9 hours ago at the time I’m writing this, and I still hurt because of it. I still really, really hate not having him around. Cancer is a disgusting, ugly, heartbreaking disease, and it doesn’t discriminate. It will absolutely ravage the best of us, even if we do everything right, and leave those around them in shock. Cancer makes those left behind in its wake fundamentally different people than they were before it showed up. 

If you’ve made it through this whole post, bless you. I’ll stop now, but leave you with one final plea:

Please, PLEASE, do not judge Harry and/or Louis for how they act in the coming weeks. 

They and their families are in pain. They do not need anything but support and love. This fandom can be so beautiful and be so good for these boys when it wants to be. Trust me when I say that they need us to have their backs, without hesitation or condemnation, now more than ever.

Thanks for reading. All the love xx

[savage-styles]

The hack was bad but you're just as bad to think h & l like being controlled. I'm not a larrie but its naive to believe they aren't under contract to stay closeted, fix your life, anti

Firstly, Anon, you’re a Larrie.  Pure and simple.  This isn’t The Emperor’s New Clothes.

Second, if anyone’s controlling, it’s Larries.  They have demanded the boys say that Larry isn’t real.  The boys did that.  It wasn’t good enough and Larries just said “They’re being forced to say that.”  When the boys have asked them to stop, they kept going.  The other boys have weighed in, informing Larries that their delusions were not only false, but that they were harmful.  What did Larries do? They got mad and pitched hissy fits and called them liars and harassed them and their families.

When the boys’ family members spoke out, Larries harassed and bullied them. They have demanded proof of Freddie’s existence.  They were given that.  They continued their demands, called everything lies, even the birth certificate (Donald Trump anyone?).  They demanded that the women in the boys’ lives behave a certain way and demanded that Briana and Louis parent the way they want them to.  They go on Louis’ family’s social media and say vile, disgusting things about them.  They sexually harass children.  

The boys’ privacy has been violated countless times and Larries think it’s funny. They accuse them of faking it and you laugh.  They’ve forced a new mother and an infant into silence, which thank goodness, Briana is getting better at saying “Fuck you.”  

Larries abused a sick woman before her death, and even after her death, continue to torment her and say she was lying about her entire family. They find minor children on social media who are related to the boys and cyber stalk and cyber bully them.  

If another man dares to hang around Harry and be close to him, and especially if that man is gay, Larries, in all their apparent advocacy for LGBT+, have wished AIDS on him, as well as death.  They continuously slander and degrade anyone who dares to go against the Larrie narrative.

They think they have a say in who the boys get to hang out with, and if they don’t like who the boys are hanging out with, they find them and make sure to let them know just how much they want them to die.  

And for what exactly?  For love?  You think that’s love?  You have a fucked up, twisted, abusive way of loving.

Every time these boys do something they don’t like, they find some way to control it, whether it be through their lies and controlling people who follow them, or by going after the boys’ friends and family.  

They’re going as far as hacking an account of someone who’s going to give what he’s earning from attention to charity and people have attacked Harry’s account, linking to vile pornography and there are Larries out there celebrating it.  

Not only do they harass the boys, their families, their friends, the people they work with, they’re victim blamers.  When Larries are called out for their behavior, they say that if the people they’re abusing don’t want to be abused, they shouldn’t have any social media or they shouldn’t act a certain way. 

That’s an abuser telling the victim that it’s their fault and it’s beyond disgusting.

And yet it’s the boys’ labels and managers who control them?

No.  

Larries try to control everything in this fandom and we’re done with them.  Fix your own damned self.

[dogsliampaynedoesntinstagram]

Lmfao you are such a Louis’ hater. You act like those who know Louis feelings (or lack of them bc y’all think he’s heartless), and his take on things. You’re wrong. You should stop projecting a Louis, bc you don’t know him at all. Are you the new princess harrie in this fandom who hates Louis??

I am becoming more and more convinced that some of these asks are generated by a mad-lib machine/bot.What I find so bizarre is that I explicitly said that we don't know how Louis feels. People have such bad boundaries between their own views and Louis' that they think that someone telling them that they don't know what Louis thinks is projecting on Louis.I do find it amusing that even today I'm accused of being a princess Harry - which apart from everything else seems a wild misread on my feelings about princesses. My main fantasy recently when it comes to Harry has been of telling him how wrong he is about politics until he cries. I guess theoretically you might also want to do that to a princess? But personally that's way more energy than I want to spend on the monarchy. The only way I'll ever be a princess Harry is if i start living out that meme about his suits and the revolution and send him to the guillotine.