#like I know people often ascribe intentionality to gaslighting

[cesium-sheep]

a not insignificant part of it is probably that mom called today, and when she called me my familial name then corrected herself to nat and apologized I told her it's okay to still call me the old name it's just weird for people who didn't know me when I was little to call me that. she insisted that she should call me what I want to be called. I should be happy. I just feel angry. I think she's being genuine in her attempt but I think she's still far too deep in denial to realize why it will always feel hollow. to even remember that she threw a tantrum when I bought myself a binder with a gift card from my uncle, or just how hard I had to fight every step of the way to get my hair cut short the first time.

I'm glad she's been such a good ally to my wife. she already burned that bridge with me and just putting up a sign that says the bridge is open doesn't make it safe.

[twelvedaysinaugust]

The concept of ‘larrie baiting’ was really made up by larries to pretend that if Harry and Louis aren’t gay for each other, then they are doing all of this intentionally and gaslighting the fans for money. It’s an argument that seeks to absolve larries of all responsibility and personal ability to leave the conspiracy behind, and makes it seem like they are powerless and being tricked.

At some point in time you need to accept that larrie was used for marketing and fan service very early on, and that completely disappeared after/around TMH. You aren't being baited. You are still ascribing conspiracy significance to things that conspiracy theorists have claimed have meaning, and you're assuming Harry and Louis know or care. They are living their lives, wearing clothes, like normal people.

I don't think Larries invented the concept of Larry-baiting. Anytime someone brings up the possibility of baiting to Larrie blog, they vehemently oppose it and argue that it's evidence for a real relationship.

You're correct to say that Harry and Louis' "bromance" was played up, but that abruptly came to an end around Take Me Home. Was that Larry-baiting? I guess you could say so. A lot of people cite the famous "Paris Interview" as something that convinced them Harry and Louis were together. Regardless of my opinion on Larry, the "Paris Interview" always seemed like a flirty friendship dynamic with a side of fan service to me.

My goal here is not to convince anyone that Larry-baiting is or isn't real. Since baiting of any sort comes down to a person's intent, I don't think we can ever know with any certainty whether Louis or Harry are baiting Larries. That said, I often see comments like, "If they really wanted to bait Larries, they'd mention each other in interviews instead of worrying about clothing." I can't decide whether I agree or not. In theory, I feel like baiting could take on many forms and would largely be driven by fan theories. For Louis especially, Larry is big business. At the same time, I think Larries have gone completely overboard with this "coded clothing" thing. Stuff like the Pink Floyd paraphernalia and blue hat Harry wore in some photos with Olivia seem like pure reaching. Over the years, I do think there are some instances of supposed "coded clothing" that are harder for me to discount. Louis' custom-made lighthouse t-shirt with the word "yes" would be an example. But is that baiting, signaling, coincidence? I don't think we can say for sure.

I think the baiting question is interesting but ultimately unknowable. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion on the matter. Some of the stuff that sticks in my head admittedly feels really silly, like the ugly red Papillon track pants Louis wore for Valentine's Day, after only wearing black pants for all the other shows. Anyways, not a hill I want to die on and certainly not proof of anything one way or another.