#no i don't want a byler sex scene

[untitled-byler-blog]

Should there be a Byler Sex Scene?

ok now that it's not a such a Hot Topic of the tag, I'll reiterate my point for those of you who weren't around for my first spiel:

disclaimer, as a sex-repulsed asexual who does not like watching sex scenes, I acknowledge my bias on the subject

in an ideal world I'm ok with a byler sex scene existing; (apparently, can't speak from experience) teenagers experience sexual thoughts/feelings and I think it's perfectly normal to portray those feelings existing, going so far as something like the Jancy scene from s2 (I don't think that characters who are minors should be explicitly shown in sexual situations (re: st4ncy in s1) regardless of the age of the actors)

That being said, there is a different obstacle that byler faces: Stranger Things can be revolutionary by being a mainstream show with such a massive following with a canon queer couple at the forefront of it when it's not an inherently queer/romance-based show; but the caveat of this is that there are a lot of people who will not be accepting of a Byler relationship. Whilst some peoples' minds will not change, the incredibly slow build up of the relationship can serve to make it much more palatable to those who sit on the fence, or perhaps even just over it.

If the audience was predominantly queer (which it is not), then having a sex scene would not be on such a fence, as the majority of the audience would perceive it (queer sex) as something that just happens. But, as that is not the case, Byler should not even so much as have an implied sex scene (in my humble, and -- as previously mentioned -- biased opinion) because it reinforces to the general audience a harmful stereotype: that queer relationships are inherently sexual

Obviously, being queer is not something sexual in and of itself, but because of this stereotype (re: because of how queerphobes perpetuated hate surrounding members of the queer community/arguing (falsely) that they are "corrupting" children by saying that their (queer people)'s existence is inherently sexual) having a queer couple that (to much of the general audience) will be coming out of nowhere, having a sex scene would only be fuel for them to continue the argument that queer=sexual

Thus I believe that for Byler to have the profound impact on the general audience that we so hope to achieve from its canon confirmation, a sex scene must be avoided at all cost; if the directors are smart, they will make sure that the relationship is not oversexualised so that it could be understood that queer people are just people, they are no different from other het ships on the show (like Lumax, who have not been shown in any overtly-sexual ways; and, with the way Max's condition is, probably will never be within the timeline of the show); and, as much as I can understand (to an extent) the satisfaction that could come with such a scene, I do not think it is a smart move from the perspective of the queer community vying for recognition as something "normal" and not "x-rated"; nor (and, unfortunately, much more importantly to netflix) from a marketing perspective

I think that subtleties like the pizza kitchen scene will be the extent of the sexual side of their attraction that we will be "shown"; and I truly think that that is for the best for everyone

[basiltonpitch]

byler having sex could be extremely important to will's coming of age as a gay man.

hear me out.

(also - before anyone comes at me for sexualizing minors - i'm not saying i want an explicit sex scene. i don't! something like jancy's s2 fade to black would be more than enough for me.)

now back to the point:

will has heard his whole life how being gay is this disgusting, dirty, vile thing - from his father & from bullies at school. likely other adults around the town, as well, considering we hear troy referencing what his dad said about will being killed by "some other queer" in season 1. not to mention this story is set in the midst of the aids epidemic. i mean, he's from a small town in bumfuck indiana, he's no doubt heard his share of casual and overt homophobia throughout the years. (and then there's the alan turing poster in s4...) long story short, he's only heard negative things about being gay. about loving other boys and wanting other boys and desiring other boys.

but then there's mike. his best friend. the one person that makes him feel like he's not a mistake for being different. for being gay.

mike & will having sex, being intimate and together in a way will was always taught was gross and wrong, and learning that it isn't any of those things - will learning that loving mike and wanting mike and desiring mike is beautiful, and wonderful, and right - and having mike want him back, desire him back, learning that it's okay, it's good, continuing that arc of mike making him feel like he's not a mistake, that he's better for being different because he gets to have this with mike - he deserves that moment, i think. and mike does, too.

[teambyler]

Byler fans, don't watch if you don't want to sob

I KNOW that if Stranger Things 5 goes the angsty route with Byler, it will DESTROY me. Watch "the first same sex kiss in film," a clip from a 1927 movie WINGS where 2 men are best friends and Allied pilots in World War I. Jack is comforting his dying best friend Dave who he accidentally shot down. I couldn't help watching this scene without thinking what an angsty Mike/Will scene will do to me:

There are even echoes of Mike and Will's story. They are best friends. They were in a love triangle, while developing a deep bond for each other. Jack apologizes to Dave for lying "about the picture":

And:

I was thinking of what angsty Mike and Will scenes would be like and I know I will be a HOT MESS if the Duffers ever get this cruel to my heart. (Which I think they will! But probably not actually permanently kill off one of them cuz CMON Will have a happy ending!)

Here's the clip. (Context: They're both Allied pilots. Dave gets shot down by the Germans. He survives and steals a German plane. Jack, in grief over Dave, shoots down Dave's plane thinking he's another "Heinie" (German). Jack arrives and realizes he just shot down his best friend.)

P.S. Follow and read my blog! I have so much to say

[bugsbenefit]

attraction in ST

or. oh god stop stripping the show of it's themes no please no it needs those, stopppp

actually making this post now bc i'm sick of people claiming anything remotely sexual or even kissing happening to the party (an opinion that often pops up in the context of byler) in s5 would be horrible, sexualising, or out of character for the show

ST has always had a realistic approach to kids growing into their sexualities. the show's never shied away from directly addressing sex and sexual feelings so i'm honestly amazed by the extremely puritan interpretation of the show. i'm assuming, in good faith, that a big part of it is coming from people not having seen the actual show in ages and are just forgetting how explicitly the show handles sexuality. instead of just assuming it's from culturally raised christian people, who feel uncomfortable seeing any portrayal of sexuality, no matter how tasteful or realistic

i'm also saying all this as an ace person myself, i get not being into sex and not wanting to see it. however, refusing to acknowledge entire themes of a fictional show just because i don't experience them is bizarre to me. sexuality is vitally important to a lot of the characters and isn't just there to be fun(gross). essentially, ST is the opposite of porn without plot

so just as a little reminder what's actually IN Stranger Things. canonically.

sorry i had this sc for ages and wanted to include it Somewhere, so here you go. at a little starter... dorry

also this is an old draft seeing the light of day now, if anything's worded weird it's bc i didn't read all of it over again so oops, grammar hard?

TLDR: the show has never shied away from explicitly addressing sexuality. buying into the puritan fanon version of the show is going to make your s5 viewing experience worse because that show doesn't exist

season 1

we're starting the show off with Stancy, which is very sexually charged in general. (even in s4 Nancy still experiences physical attraction to Steve despite them having unchanged compatibility) the plot surrounding them in s1 explicitly focuses on Nancy having sex with Steve and later regretting that choice. the scene that everyone remembers, is of course, the "explicit" (not really, because ST is really tasteful with how it shows these teens explore themselves) sex scene

they're in sophomore and junior year of highschool here. around 15 and 16 years old - yet the show doesn't shy away from letting them figure things out. and it's not like this sexual theme is contained in only that scene. it keeps coming back the whole season as Nancy tries to sort her feelings out and deals with the aftermath of that night

also sidenote here while still at Steve and his party: even Steve's friends are very casual with their sexualities. and yes, they can even explicitly mention sex and specific sexual acts, no holding back here

Nancy's character conflict in s1 very much hinges on her sexuality and sexual themes. and it's not like there is a magic you need to be at least this old rule to know what sex is on the show like so many people seem to believe, because even 12 year old Mike seems to very much know what his sister and Steve are up to. he even goes out of his way to use it against her

iconic line! but i've seen insane takes trying to spin this into something not alluding to something sexual. i'm sorry to say if he doesn't think they're full on having sex he at least thinks they're getting very intimate with each other regardless

so not even the youngest characters on the show are "innocent and pure" the way fandom likes to claim when it comes to sexuality. and of course they aren't. real 12 year olds know what sex is, they're young not oblivious

and the following seasons make that even more obvious

season 2

as of s2 the kids are getting more involved with the sexual jokes, not just making them about other people but even being directly involved with those themes themselves. which is also realistic. with 13 sexuality starts to get thrown your way by every possible form of media. lots of them start developing crushes, have no idea how relationships work, etc. it's messy, typical teens thrown into the dating game. (i say all of this from a developmental media psychology perspective thanks uni and not personal experience sorry lmao, i'm a bit too ace to have my own input here)

s2 features comedic and awkward mentions of sex(ual activity) towards Lucas and Max,

older peers giving their 13 year old friends well meant advice on how relationships work,

and has even younger characters play around with attraction/kissing/love as well, which is incredibly normal for kids to do at that age

they're all young and the show treats growing up realistically. while the theme of attraction or sexuality gets more relevant for them (in scenes that are often received with awkwardness by the characters themselves) the show offers them safe territory to stand on. none of them are directly confronted with sexuality and are instead offered people to seek advice from for example

meanwhile the sexuality theme for the older kids is still very much explicit. just as Nancy's arc is still heavily tied to her romance and sexuality (which ties into her non conformity themes - she's an ambition driven person trying to escape the culdesac life first and foremost)

not only do we get another sex scene (this time with a cut away), there's also explicit jokes about it after

sexuality on the show is continuously awkward and messy. Jonathan and Nancy are only 16-17 here - no one really knows what they're doing or what the right way to go ahead is and Jonathan rightfully almost does a spittake here. out of pocket Murray

sexuality. is. awkward. (we get is s2 thanks)

season 3

s3 gets even more explicit with it's awkward puberty sexuality themes

from Dustin talking about how much he likes kissing Suzie (and her liking him not having teeth for it?) which weirds Steve out to the repeating, awkwardly received, "happy screams joke" (which gets a callback in later scene)

sexuality is still awkward for them. it's a realistic approach to what 14 year olds act like and know. they're actively dating by now, they're kissing people And have messy relationship situations. all while still acknowledging knowing what sex and attraction is, duh, of course they know that. but i'm explicitly pointing it out because i see obscene amounts of people claiming the characters are completely sheltered and even implying that they know what sex is would be gross. to that i say, do you not remember being 14???

and while i'm at s3, also let it be mentioned that even the adults are suffering at the hands of the sexuality theme here. Hopper's hookups with random women are focused on in s1, but now that he's getting closer with Joyce they get very explicitly told to just have sex. literally

not putting the whole dialogue in here, i already have too many images because there's so many sex mentions in this show and he really just tells them their mating ritual is painful and they should tear their clothes off and fuck right now

thanks Murray, always insightful

season 4

and s4 has stopped just confronting the kids with the existence of sexuality, but is tentatively starting to explore mature themes more directly - which allows them to tentatively start exploring their own sexualities instead of just having to acknowledge the general concept of sexuality

Max gets to ogle shirtless Steve

Lucas has something under his bed that's never confirmed as anything except "100/10 gross" but had 90% of the audience i saw immediately assume something sexual (magazines or the like)

and has a bunch more direct nudges, from the kids "experimenting sexually" as Murray says

to Argyle explicitly telling Jonathan he needs to have sex with Nancy again

to Hopper and Joyce's escalating make out in a church while shirtless

to visual innuendos (i'm looking at you hose scene. this one wouldn't be such a big deal if there wasn't a genuine moral panic about it last year. which was crazy. people literally had to pretend the scene didn't exist to escape the witchhunting mobs, except instead of being killed for magic it'd be for looking at a canon scene and acknowledging it. crazy times - aside from that there's also more visuals you can take as innuendos in s4e1 which there's already posts about out there so i'm not getting into them here, i'm more focused on the overt textual references)

to Yuir extensively talking about pleasing women and making them cum (I'm sparing you from that, the sc in at the top was already enough)

to explicit graffities all over the place, like here as an example "give me head until i'm dead" which is in frame for the whole phone call and Steve talking about his bitchlesness. and is also some of the only easily legible text (i hope this is readable, most of my screenshots kind of died a bit so maybe you need to look at an actual clip to see the text)

that is aside from the "DRUGS" poster which touches on another point s4 makes. the show doesn't just explore sexuality, it also puts the kids into more mature situations in general (not talking about the deaths, this is a horror show), specifically drugs

Jonathan uses weed as a coping mechanism the whole season and Eddie even sells the stuff in full bags (insane weed selling practices btw, even i know that). Chrissy (17-18) wants to do weed and ketamine. and we also see Lucas (14) hungover after drinking at a party for the first time

the show does not shy away from portraying realistic teen experiences

Murray called s4 very well, the kids pound some bears, smoke some ganja, play nintendo, and experiment sexually

literally. you have drinking, weed, and confusing queer sexualities. they took this list step by step

and all of those pretty normal things teens tend to explore. and i say that as someone who was decidedly not into those things. the ace experience is a bit different, but i can still acknowledge how that period was like for my allo friends and people in general

there is an extreme push in this fandom to reject any form of sexual jokes or references in the show, made mostly by people being uncomfortable with portrayals of sexuality. however, the themes not only still exist, they're also very prominent throughout all 4 seasons and are important to a lot of the characters directly

and it's also noteworthy here to see how ST approaches it's sexuality theme. it grows with the characters. starting out as jokes and being received with awkwardness to slowly letting them figure things out on their own time and turns. an extremely realistic progression and very common for coming of age narratives such as ST. it's a far cry from shows exploring sexuality or sexual themes for the sake of the viewers enjoyment like Euph0ria (don't want it to show up in tags)

based on what we currently know s5 could very well be taking place in 1988 or later which would place the party at around 16-17 years old. going into the season with the fanon version of the show that is completely clean and non sexual will 100% set you up for disaster

ST is very realistic and non exploitative with it's exploration of teen sexuality so there is obviously nothing to worry about in the sexualization department, that's just puritan fear mongering. however, it's very likely that we're going to get more than holding hands or pecks on the lips from the characters that are now older than characters we've explicitly seen hook up before. there could be more intimate scenes or making out, yes. but there's also at least one basically guaranteed vulgar joke in there, all seasons have them

there's no real theorizing or speculation about s5 here, anything could happen and i'm not placing bets, i want the characters narratives to be wrapped up well first and foremost and trust the writers to do it well. however, going into s5 with some of the mindsets i've seen circulating on here and expecting the show to be "clean" and cater to a version of it that's never existed outside of purified fandom could genuinely make you feel blindsided by the shows canon themes

not targeted at anyone or anything specifically, just using this as a bit of a reality check of what the show is actually like after recently rewatching all of it in one go

[bylrlve]

403-404 thoughts

(Prev post here)

Murray’s prophecy of the kids playing too much Nintendo, eating too much junk food, smoking some ganja, pounding some beers, and experimenting sexually is actually eerily accurate. Nintendo, as @gayofthefae brilliantly observed, has been equated to the Nina project. Eating junk food? The boys presumably survived on the (quickly cold) pizzas and the sodas Argyle delivered to their house - and if they stopped at gas stations… these boys would have little to no money on their persons, so junk is all they could really afford, one assumes. Smoking ganja? Jon and Argyle. Pounding beers? Not the Cali gang, but Lucas did.

Experimenting sexually? No one has sex during s4 - Jopper makeout but that’s hardly experimenting, and certainly not for adults, and he was specifically talking about the kids. None of them are in the mood for it, naturally, but I wouldn’t be surprised if this is foreshadowing… something between a certain pair of boys. It couod be a cheeky reference to Will growing into his sexuality but, and forgive my crudeness here, right-hand solo sex doesn’t really fit, especially since he was talking about Jonathan, El, Mike, and Will as a group, implying a plural. In fact, this scene takes place directly after El and Mike fight, and after she is arrested. Experimenting is a very loaded word…

Never fails to get me how Mike just threw her last letter into the trash - it had already been explained that he may not see her for months, and here he is, treating her last missive to him with such disrespect. This attitude isn’t even new - he crumpled up and tossed aside the letter she’d painstakingly written and drawn rainbow designs on in the opening minutes. Meanwhile… there are Funko Pops of him proudly showing off the new painting Will made for him.

“You’re packed already?” “Yeah, I mean, I never really unpacked.” is the most blatantly subtext-ridden thing to come out of Mike’s mouth all season, and it’s the biggest piece of in-verse proof that he was fronting hard during 402 - and that was the lovey-doviest he was with El.

Can we all just take a moment to appreciate Mike saying that home isn’t home without Will? Fuck the monologue, that is the most romantic thing Mike says all season.

@bylertruth3r made the above video, showing the eerily similarity between the Byler 404 reunion and a scene in 13 Reasons Why - and this scene was originally scripted as Mike coming up to Will kneeling oj the ground, meaning it was conceived as them being much closer together.

I don’t think we appreciate, enough, that Mike monologued to Will in this scene. Not only are Jasons’s ily to Chrissy at the pep rally, Jancy’s ilys, Argyle and Eden’s LAFS, Max’s saving herself from Vecna with flashbacks, and Dustin’s ILY to Eddie all contrasts to the Mike monologue sequence in 409… but this is, too. Here are Mike’s three big monologues lain out:

"El? I don't know if you can hear this, but... but if you can, I want you to know I'm here, okay? I'm right here. And... I love you. El, do you hear me? I love you. I'm sorry I don't say it more. I... It's not because I'm scared of you. I'm not. I've never felt that way. Never. But I am scared that one day you'll realize you don't need me anymore. And I thought if I said how I felt, it would somehow make that day hurt more. But the truth is, El, I don't know how to live without you. I feel like my life started that day we found you in the woods. You were wearing that yellow Benny's Burgers T-shirt. And it was so big it almost swallowed you whole. And I knew right then and there, in that moment, that I loved you. And I've loved you every day since. I love you on your good days. I love you on your bad days. I love you with your powers, I love you without your powers. I love you for exactly who you are. You're my superhero. And... I can't lose you. Okay? Do you hear me? I can't lose you. You can do anything. You can fly. You can move mountains. I believe that. I really do. But right now, you just have to fight. Okay? El. Do you hear me? You need to fight! You have to fight. Fight!” Tearing up, not crying.

“Do you remember the first day that we met? It was… it was the first day of kindergarten. I knew nobody. I had no friends. And I just felt so alone, and so scared, but… I saw you on the swings, and you were alone too,. You were just swinging by yourself. And I just walked up to you, and I asked. I asked if you wanted to be my friend. And you said yes. You said yes. It was the best thing I’ve ever done.”

“Hey also, about the last few days… No, no, no. You didn’t deserve anything. Listen, the truth is… the last year has been weird, you know. And I mean, Max and Lucas and Dustin… they’re great, they’re great, itd just… it’s Hawkins. It’s not the same without you. And I feel like I was worrying too much about El, and I don’t know. I feel like I… lost you, or something. I have no idea what’s going to happen next. But whatever it is, I think we should work together. I think it’ll be easier if we’re a team. Best friends. Cool.”

Some quick observations:

1 and 2 occur under near-identical circumstances - El and Will are under Vecna’s control and he’s trying to give them strength. 3 is entirely unprompted. The first occurs under a level of duress similar to that of a gun being held to El’s head, as gayofthefae observes here

The rain fight is all over the s4 bedroom scene, and it’s very clearly on both of their minds. Mike has spent the past nine months addressing every criticism of Will’s - he’s friends with Dusfin, he’s playing D&as, he only kissed El when she initiated, and broke it quickly, and he even got angry at Lucas for prioritising others over the Party - although his complaint, unlike Will’s, was irrational and unfair. He relapsed at the airport and roller rink by trying to be normal, but this scene is him course-correcting for that. Mike’s calling himself a self-pitying idiot and thanking Will for being sensible is likelt not only referring to the earlier scene in Will’s room, but to the S3 and 402 fights. If that is the intention, it makes one wonder what Mike was self-pitying about in the latter. @howtobecomeadragon discusses it in-depth here

Right from my very first watch, the proposal imagery in the s2 speech - ‘I walked up to you, and I asked. I asked if you wanted to be my _, and you said yes… you said yes. It was the best thing I’ve ever done.’ - jumped out at me. M*levens regularly theorise that the series will end with Mike and El either getting married, or engaged, citing that Lucas line from s1 as foreshadowing - but we see in s3 that Mike relies on Lucas to push him through every stage of the apology, while he doesn’t with Will, and we see bouquet imagery subverted with that gift of flowers at the airport (see below).

TOO MUCH? Mike spent the s3-4 break backsliding in the whole ‘say ILY to El’ plot… but did address the problems Will had with him. Not only that… he came to the conclusion that he worried too much about El? Specifically because he lost Will as a result? I said in the previous post that Bylers don’t talk enough about “Who… who said that I didn’t?” We definitely don’t talk enough about the anti-m*leven implications of this line, because they’re bonkers. Mike worries a lot about El when she’s away at Nina, but at home he’s distinctly distant from her -

while only drawing closer to Will

This is how he looked at Will during the 404 monologue btw: (gif credit to @palettehao and gayofthefae)

Lastly, I’ll finish this analysis post by swinging back to 402, and to the fact that Mike picking that bouquet? It doesn’t make much sense, timeline-wise. In fact, I honestly can’t figure out when he picked them.

Mike only says, on March 22, that he picked them ‘in Hawkins’ before launching into a nervous, distracting spiel about picking 70:30 purple to yellow, only maybe he picked too much yellow*, etc.

On the morning of March 21 he was still in his underwear reading over a letter to El, and was delayed going to with. He had classes at school, and was preoccupied during lunch bargaining with Eddie, bargaining wi5 various students, and finally bargaining with Erica. Between school and Hellfire he could plausibly have picked them, but that would have required cycling across town and back, when Nancy drove him to school - he didn’t have his bike at school. He also had nowhere to put them, except the backpack that presumably had school supplies in it - those flowers would not have looked so fresh had he shoved them in a backpack. Dustin also doesn’t mention him being gone prior to Hellfire. After hellfire, he went home to be there by 9 - he had to have done, otherwise he wouldn’t have been allowed on the flight.

His flight was at 6:30 and Indiana -> Cali takes 4 hrs 10 minutes. He would have been awake from very early in the morning with Karen, gathering his stuff, and then driving to the airport with adequate time to check-in and board the plane. There isn’t a hope in hell of Karen letting him randomly cycle across town in the dark for an undetermined length of time just to pick some fucking flowers, lmao. There is a strong chance, however, that Karen, the romantic, let him buy flowers and a pen in the Indianapolis airport before boarding the flight. Maybe she even purchased them.

The kicker? The bouquet of flowers had a fancy, polished-looking greeting card attached, one professionally made.

There is something deliciously meta about those flowers. M*levens have adopted yellow and purple as a symbol of the relationship - even though Mike only wore those colours to please her when he was being ‘hokey’ and a ‘knock-off’, to quote Argyle and the costume designer. I’m not even sure El truly favours those colours, as she doesn’t wear them much and doesn’t have any notable items in those colours. For all we know, she was asked if she had any favourite colours and simply picked two that came to mind.

What’s more, it seems very likely that Mike simply lied to her about putting in the effort of getting them himself, and instead relied on something pre-made and commercial. It isn’t impossible that he picked them, however (though the timing is a mystery) - we are shown at the end of the season that the field outside Hopper’s cabin has very similar flowers. But those… well… those have their own implications

*talk about subtext lmao…

To finish, I want to share a delicious finding from @sapphicjopper on twitter from last may - the working name for st4 was Tareco. There’s a song called Tareco & Mariola, all about a girl who knows her lover isn’t right for her, who knows that she doesn’t need him, and who is leaving him - ‘it’s not you who will give me the spring, the beautiful flowers I dreamed of in summer’. It’s reminiscent of the opera Nina - about a woman waiting for her lover, not accepting that he won’t return and be how she desperately wants him to be.

[spicybylerpolls]

“Nobody does anything cool anymore, and everybody is afraid of everything,” Vinson Cunningham said in a recent roundtable about the death of the sex scene for the New Yorker. “We are in a decadent, post-excitement world.”

The widespread access to porn online, according to Cunningham, raised the bar for a sex scene from titillation to plot. It wasn’t enough to make people horny; a sex scene had to move the story forward or serve a stylistic purpose. Narrative momentum can in itself be a turn-on. As a teenager growing up online, I was significantly less interested in porn, which felt obviously fake, than in Youtube compilations and cuts of various sex scenes, which had the trappings of real characters, and thus real life. The scenes felt fascinating, shocking, spellbinding, adult. Maybe not actually realistic, but vibrant and vital, validation of my own capacity for eroticism. Sex is an essential part of humanity, sex scenes an essential reflection of the human experience. Perhaps the most frustrating element of this particular anti-sex scene argument is its fixation on a justification for sex on-screen, as if people wanting to have sex or wanting to be turned on is not character-driven or important enough. To deny the power of sex on-screen is to deny one of the core reasons to watch anything in the first place: desire, a basic human impulse and a gift.

from this article: https(:)//archive.ph/VqXbY

And as relates to byler and culture itself, another piece....

In a culture of convenience, where values are understood increasingly through their digital imprints, things feel nauseatingly 2D because they literally are. Marshall McLuhan predicted this a long time ago. [in the 60s with his 'the medium is the message' - a concept which relates to ST as a whole!] I’ve started thinking of this quality as sexlessness. I’m using sex here as a euphemism for the natural arousal that attends life in 3D, sexual or not. It is the antithesis of the gamified pleasure we pursue online, which has now infiltrated our values offline too. Consider beauty, which is today often understood as a set of objective, imitable, purchasable characteristics, rather than a quality experienced through movement, context, subjectivity, mystery, actual presence. When I think of the dominant trends of the last five or 10 years, most of them engender this same lack of humanity: personal branding; biohacking; virtual reality; reality television; fillers and filters; botox and plastic surgery; being extremely online; corporate activism; minimalism; cancel culture; labels for every type of person and personality... One way to view the irritating state of things is as a kind of collective sexual frustration. '“Nobody does anything cool anymore, and everybody is afraid of everything."'

The above is from: https(:)//haleynahman.substack.com/p/89-the-death-of-sex

I see this page has died down a bit but wanted to drop this for any deep thinkers out there, because it speaks to the wider issue and shows how spicy byler tumblr (and indeed byler tumblr, and by extension ST fandom and all fandom itself) is part of this wider issue of being engrossed in the kind of culture that removes you from visceral, realistic pleasures and what this might mean for society.

Can we expect eroticism from Stranger Things? Not in an arthouse way, I don't think, but i'm fascinated to see how they position themselves in the zeitgeist of gay media, conservative media, and media that is willing to portray sex - especially considering that the portrayal of sex could and would indeed have narrative purpose for mike and will. the duffers might just have set up one of the best stories to portray this experience, and redefine the entire genre if they can pull it off.

Always grateful for your thoughts and contributions to the spicy byler fandom (and the byler fandom at large), scrunchietown. It's so true that there's a general sexlessness in media, even as people try to complain that everything's too sexualized when that's not true, especially not in mainstream movies. Last summer there were a lot of people freaking out about the (pretty tame) sex scene in Oppenheimer! Perhaps there are more sex scenes in Max shows like Euphoria, but even so, I do think the Duffers have the opportunity to do something truly special and redefine the sex scene. Byler has the opportunity to be groundbreaking in so many ways!

"One way to view the irritating state of things is as a kind of collective sexual frustration."

Society if Byler helps to heal our collective sexual frusturation:

[henrysglock]

🔥

I talked about this a bit last night, but I realized I still have more to say.

ST tumblr in general, but specifically bylerblr, tends to be so ship-focused that they lose sight of many plot lines and themes of the show.

"We want Will with superpowers so he can defend his established useless pathetic wet cat boyfriend Mike!" "We want..." [checks notes and grimaces] "...a byler sex scene..." "We want El to have very little screen time...So all the screen time can go to Will and byIer!!" "We don't want any more depth into HNL. We want to have time for Will and Mike to have fifteen different coming out scenes!" "We want Henry to die painfully! No we don't care about his story...unless it has byler/Will crumbs!! We only care if it has byler proof or proof of Will with powers!!"

Like...do any of them actually like the show? Do they like the central plot? The core themes? The sci fi horror?

The central plot has always been HNL. How can anyone say they want to trade the core plot for ship content about two guys who are just kinda...on par with straight ships? (That's right. I said it. ByIer is just on-par with straight ships. They'll never be Peter and Olivia from Fringe, though. Unfortunately.)

And when byler becomes canon, because it will become canon, the fandom is going to scream about it so loudly that they drown out all the other important aspects of the show. Aspects like:

"Love can pull people back from the brink, even people some might consider too far gone."

"Children need love. When they don't get it, when they're rejected and isolated, they become highly susceptible to harm." (And we DON'T blame the child, we blame the ADULTS who FAILED the child)

"Don't blame the victim, especially when the victim is a child."

"Children don't need to be strong, they need to be protected."

"Sometimes, adults need to be protected too."

"Children are not evil. They are just learning how to survive. Treat them with grace and leniency."

"It's more likely that a troubled child is the result of a good child in a troubled home than it is that the troubled child is simply pure evil."

"You don't need superpowers to be a hero. You just need to be kind and brave."

"You should be kind to and respectful of people, even if they're odd, annoying, or cringe."

"Just because you think you're right doesn't mean you are right."

"Draw conclusions from evidence rather than pursuing evidence for a conclusion."

"Often times, doing more research will uncover crucial information you didn't catch on your first try. Don't assume you know everything."

"Don't make accusations without doing your research. Malicious entities will use this ignorance to their advantage every time."

"Unchecked bias, willful ignorance, and bigotry are killers."

"DON'T TAKE THE CHILD ABDUCTING DOCTOR AT FACE VALUE ABOUT THE MORALITY OF HIS FIRST VICTIM, SOMEONE HE HAS VESTED VALUE IN SMEARING AND SCAPEGOATING."

"THE GOVERNMENT IS PROBABLY LYING TO YOU. IF THEY HAVE A VESTED INTEREST IN LYING TO YOU, ASSUME THEY ARE LYING TO YOU."

"The support of friends, family, and the community can be just as powerful as, if not more powerful than, romance."

Just...to name a few.

But yes, tell me again about how the two gay boys kissed. That was clearly the sole takeaway from the entire Stranger Things anthology.

Send me a 🔥 for an unpopular opinion (you can request topics!)

[starsarefire824]

Am I bringing up this debate again? Yes, yes I am.

Do you realistically think Byler could/will have an implied sex scene in S5? Why or why not? Like in all honesty, I know this is a huge NONO topic but I want to know what ppl think.

lol

Hello Nonnie!

This is not a NONO topic for me at all.

But no, in all honestly, I don't realistically think there could/will be an implied sex scene in season five for byler. Or possibly any other characters honestly. other than maybe a jopper waking up in bed scene etc.

I don't think this is because things won't be happening with byler, but I honestly just don't think there will be time. There's going to be so much happening, so much plot they're gonna have to get through, so much love stories and loose ends and the vecna/end of the world of it all.

Do I think there will be tension? YES. Do I think there will be kissing? YES. Could it even be hot and heavy? Sure. Otherwise? I'm no so sure.

The only way I could realistically seeing something happen is because of the end of the world thing and a possible want of losing virginity going on before they "die".

And of course I hope Byler happens, but honestly this could be a plausible plot line for Mileven too if that's the route the Duffers' decide to go.

Also, side thought, I think if anything with Will's plot line directly addressing his sexuality and therefore his wants and desires for Mike, a masturbation or implied fantasy scene is probably way more likely than a sex scene between any of the teens.

[wisehearts]

Random thought that occurred to me as I was rewatching season 1, is that why are so many people against an implied/leading up to sexy scene for byler?

We literally see Steve and Nancy have a pretty obvious intimate scene in season 1 and I don’t want to hear ��Byler are minors’ SO WERE STEVE AND NANCY THEY WERE LIKE WHAT 16?! At most. I get that there’s not a happy correlation with it because of Barb but that’s not the point. The point is that the Duffers could very well make byler go there if they wanted to.

It’s a different story if you’re to say the actors are minors but that’s the thing they’re not any more and by the looks of it they could possibly be onboard with the more intimate Byler scenes.

Idk like I’m not gonna be outraged if it happens because it’s pretty clear the show runners and writers aren’t afraid to include something like this within the show

You're right on all accounts honestly! There is nothing wrong with it. it's homophobia, straight up. I can hear a "you're calling me homophobic for not wanting to see two gay teens have sex?" in the distance but I mean... yeah? technically. The characters are fictional. 17/18 is a normal age to explore sex. The actors are adults. The characters are fictional. sex - especially gay sex - isn't dirty and if you (collective you) think mike and will heavy petting or having sex taints them and makes them less innocent (pure) then yes you're being homophobic. even if you yourself are queer. and I encourage them to learn their queer history to see why it'd be impactful if they did give us a scene (AIDS!!!) and stop holding conservative beliefs 🙂🙃

Being uncomfortable with sex or sex scenes (or not yet being mature enough for them) =/= they shouldn't happen, and that they can't happen between teen characters. s1 sex scene being "bad" as it's not right for nancy and plays alongside barb's death =/= sex is bad, which is what those people imply they think when they say sex was only used negatively in the show. And it wasn't anyway, nancy and jonathan have sex right after their first kiss and it's a positive thing.

The major thing is that the goal posts keep moving. they can't decide why it's bad, they confuse their personal individual discomfort with it being a collective moral issue so it never makes sense. A big ol' echo chamber.

"No byler sex!" > "okay you can discuss sexuality in st but you can't fantasize and write fics!" > "okay you can write fics about their sexual attraction or the time period but pure smut is fetishizing!" 🤦‍♀️

"they're minors!" > "okay they're adults but you watched them grow up and if I can't let that go then obviously that means you can't either so you're weird!" *I glance at incredibly long list of hollywood heartthrobs that have been acting since they were very young* 🤦‍♀️

The latest one I've seen is "they're gonna be 18 in s5 but I don't want them to be because we can't protect them from the weirdos when they sexualize". like okay cool thank you for the heads up that it'll be okay by your standards then?

I personally don't have an opinion on whether I think there will or won't be a scene for byler, but of course if there's anything intimate I'll cheer it on because a terrified teenage gay couple saying fuck society and letting go of fear to love and be with each other physically, is so much better than spitting on the importance of more queer intimacy in media.

[castlebyersafterdark]

ok.... https://youtu.be/VxblhG1Kra4?si=NwlxW_kDmHIEvER5&t=82

baby cast alert, plus i know you hate interviews but this segment is literally 10 seconds long (the whole video is chaotic mess hahahha) and its just the softest noah/will you ever did see, i adoreeeeeee we need this energy for byler s5 ending

ADORABLE! Baby Noah is the cutest thing ever, what a sweet kid!!! And yes!! I love that the cast and the boys in general are all so openly affectionate with each other, I really love that. As much as we want a lot of Finn and Noah interviews, and I hope we get a lot of those two together, also yay to the boys in general!! They always have such good energy as a group.

And I don't hate interviews, there's just certain things that make me feel really awkward or anxious watching: when the actors looks uncomfortable, when the interviewer is asking really basic cringey questions or has zero chemistry with the cast, when fans are super emotional meeting the cast, and the loose free form fan Q/A panels at cons are literal nightmares to watch haha. I can handle some content no problem, but those are big iffy ones for me.

We talk about a big Byler kiss or two or three or the implications of a sex scene. Yes to the first, shock and awe to the second, but we also need a really really good hug!!! I feel like they HAVE to give us the hug of all time with Mike and Will after the airport debacle...

Ending this with the cutie of all time. Look at him!!

[id-rather-be-home]

how do you think byler handles it when either of them wants to back out of a sexual interaction mid way/during? like, would their be a safe word involved, would a simple “stop” be enough, or something else? i’d love to hear you’re thoughts on how’d they communicate!!!

i absolutely LOVE this question anon!

there aren't a ton of fics out there that explore this concept (which makes sense) but it is definitely one that I want to touch on in my own story so i'm very excited to get this ask

i think sometimes there can be situations in which the other just knows when their partner is uncomfortable or simply not in the mood anymore. it'd be very on par for mike's character especially to pick up on the tiniest body cues coming from will! picking up on those would be enough for mike (or will) to back up and check in, to ask if there's anything wrong, if they want to keep going, etc.

other times, of course, picking up on nonverbal body cues isn't as easy, especially when they're in the middle of foreplay or having sex. i do think that most of the time a basic "stop" would be enough for the both of them to back off and check in. this would probably be in cases of their regular less kinky sex where they feel that an actual safe word isn't necessary BUT they do definitely have an established safe word just in case

for example, if they're doing something kinkier or even a bit less vanilla (like bondage, spanking, overstimulation) then the safe word would be more likely to be used just because sometimes "stop" doesn't always actually mean stop. i can see them making the safe word be something as common as "red" or the general traffic light system where it's green for good, yellow for slow down, and red for stop. i don't think they'd make it anything like "vecna" or something related to the upside down since that could be heavily triggering, especially during something as emotional and vulnerable as sex

when either of them needs to stop there is of course aftercare involved! the aftercare will differ depending on when they needed to stop or what they were doing or why they needed to stop. like, will telling mike "stop" or "hang on" when they're making out simply because he's not in the mood or he's too busy for sex is very different than him telling mike "stop" when they're in the middle of actual sex or a scene

aftercare for the first could be something small like mike kissing will's forehead and telling him, "i love you" before they carry on as usual. aftercare for the second scenario would be a lot more involved, with mike first being focused on getting will out of whatever possible bad headspace he was in with cuddling or giving him space to breathe and then talking to him about what it was that made him need to stop so they can avoid it in the future. and that could all be followed up with a bath, food and water, even more cuddling, etc. there's always verbal comfort thrown in, like mike (or will) telling the other how much they love them, thanking them for telling them, all that jazz

[i-am-autistic]

And finally on Nancy's character I do have to say I find it weird people problematize inherently the act of sexualizing her in the show or her having romance in the show. Or just generally like not to say Nancy's depiction is entirely devoid of misogyny but inherently I don't find anything wrong with a sexual depiction of such a character and I find it weird people do. It's also somewhat misogynistic I feel that the 1000000 gratuitous depictions of sexuality that exist in males teen fiction is like not even allowed at 1% for characters that are meant for women for some reason cuz everyone knows women are sexless. It's like.......people realize women and teen girls get horny, have sex, romantic lives, etc right like it's not a very unique thing to sexualize them or make romance important for them. Sure I'd argue most depictions in pop media is problematic but not all. I hope people will understand sexualization=acknowledgement of sexual life not simply for the purposes of male gaze enjoyment. I get that there is a feminist push for more diverse representation, I just think it shouldn't color the actual analysis of what is there. It's not impossible to have both characters who are and aren't into romance. It's just that is blatantly a part of Nancy's character that she loves people deeply of which her boyfriend is her scene partner in about 80% of the show, it is genuinely ridiculous to pretend like the development she had was independent of him or that it is uniquely true to the character for her to have an *independent* ending . Obviously there is gratuity and crossing the line wrt gratuity but I'd hardly say Nancy in the show is sexualized gratuitously in the sense of her having a ton of sexualization, it's mostly present in the show as merely an acknowledgement of her sexuality rather than a focus or gratuitous. And that's just good honest writing.......like would it be better for people if two horny teenagers got together and the sex was just not acknowledged like they're the scooby gang. Just like Jonathan and Nancy sitting there fully clothed in S3. Also as a third thing, this is a hot take and I don't mean it to anyone who enjoys those tags, makes fanfics,fandom content or anything for them. I enjoy a lot of it and everything is allowed and supported by me in fandom. I'm talking very specifically about a very small subsect of posts I saw just after S4 and not broadly about this community or 99% of the posts I see from it. But I just don't get like as someone who ships a lot of the queer ships in the show(Loudly Jargyle and quietly Ronance and Byler while also supporting most others just not actively shipping them) l don't get people who want to generally downplay the role Nancy and Jonathan have had in eachothers lives. As I enjoy both of them and enjoy them as queer characters it is weird to me in both fandoms that sometimes you find people who discard the opposing character and as someone who enjoys both it kinda sucks to read. Like hey....queer people can like people of the opposing gender and have relationships with them too, it's not like awful to acknowledge that the romance was deep and loving. Not that everyone is like this, just there are some fanfics that feel like they put in the effort to put the other character/romance down and I'm like damn. I get that some people just don't want to include like an entire paragraph about Nancy talking about Jonathan's hair when they want to write lesbian sex. The above hot take is kinda separate from the rest of the post. What I guess I mean to say is it's weird to me that we get so puritan with stuff we go back to the 50s with the misogyny like some people really want women to be depicted as like sexless and romanceless and they don't enjoy romance or sex and their romantic or sexual partners are not allowed to be important and they can't enjoy or just have sex. Also men can do all these things with no problem and it's often endearing for them to do so.

[kuumara]

sorry, the abbreviations came out wrong but I was trying to say that finn already has a jerking off scene in when you finish saving the world.

what I’m trying to say tho is that at the end of the day, people should be able to do whatever they want with fictional characters and there’s nothing wrong with fantasizing - which I know is a dirty word to some, but still

if people fantasize about romantic scenarios including “will and mike making out sloppily,” how are sexual scenarios any different?

every fandom in history with teenage characters has had a spicy side. look at harry potter!

both finn and noah are adults too, so even if there’s a taboo related to “well the actors are minors,” that isn’t true and hasn’t been true for a while. sex is a part of, life and coming-of-age, and there’s a chance S5 explores that to some extent as it has done with jancy and stancy. byler will be around the same age and queer ships should be awarded the same desire

I don’t see how that can ever be wrong?

I said it's not wrong it just weird to me idk how to explain it more but also u won't really change my opinion if thats what ur trying to do, respectfully

Yeah of course in the story it's aight I AGREE WITH THAT DUH but the people i saw talking about it were talking ab actors too (in that same way - and NOT what other scenes they've had in other movies but like, personal lives) which really made it weird, and ik u arent talking ab actors but still just to explain

Even tho i still find it a bit off putting considering it in the show(i promise i don't see Mike and Will like widdle babies btw), i don't really care otherwise

P.s. the "making out sloppily" ive also never been a real fan of but also i havent seen people talking ab it so explicitly so I never really cared

(i might just be autistic tho)

[reikunrei]

thank you for tagging me @emblazons !!

when did you post your first ever fanfic? this is a very good question because i don't know if i'll have an accurate answer!! unfortunately i've deleted a lot of my old fanfics, both off ao3 and off of my laptop. however, i know i wrote a couple attack on titan fanfics back when i was into the series, but i was really only into it around 2013-14, so likely around then !!

first character you wrote for: following the thread from my answer above, probably eren jaeger?? i might have written something before the fic i'm thinking of, but i wrote one from eren's pov, so i guess he might be the answer !!

main character(s) you’re currently writing for: henry creel and scott clarke all day every day babeyyy they're my beautiful gay middle aged (but not really) men who i love so very very dearly, they mean everything to me, nothing else interests me right now, they are my life and it's just a little tiny bit embarrassing lol

character(s) you haven’t written about before but plan on writing about soon: oh i have no idea... unfortunately all the fic ideas i have are either creelarke, byler/genfic, or free! related and... i've written about basically all of those characters lol, at least the ones i would feel inclined to write for. hrrrmm i suppose the byler/genfic idea i have (that i'm not even sure will ever actually turn into a fic) will potentially involve a lot of scenes involving brenner, and i haven't ever really written about him, so that might count!!

fandom(s) you’re currently writing for: stranger things!! i guess i could also count free!, but the wip fic that i have hasn't been touched in a couple years lol

platonic pairing(s) you currently write for: i suppose the st party? that whole crew? but again, the only actual wips i have going right now are creelarke. and while they are boybesties. i am very much always writing about them fucking so. not really purely platonic lol

your top 3 tags on AO3 (if you post your works on AO3): idk if there's a way to check this for realsies but i can assume that these would be: vaginal sex, trans male character, andddd uuuuh probably oral sex lmao sorry gang all we got here is pussy

your current platform where you post your works: on my ao3 under my ancient username SocksAreArgyle

snippet of the wip you’re currently working on: temporarily titled "ride, baby," consisting of, unsurprisingly, more creelarke porn

i tag @antisociallilbrat and @caffernnn and anyone else who wants to do it !! i know lots of folks have already been tagged :p

[spicybylerpolls]

It's interesting that in episode 7, the episode Will, Mike and the rest of the Cali Crew are conveniently left out of, the show raises the question about November 6th. About the Upside Down being stuck on November 6th, the day Will got lost.

And RIGHT after this happens, the show ALSO raises the question, via Dustin's dialogue, "Why is there a gate at Lovers' Lake?"

Meanwhile, in the midst of these questions being raised, Nancy is talking about Will - Will finding a way to speak to Joyce through the lights. So throughout these two questions being raised, Will is consistently contextualized beside them.

Now I don't exactly know how this all fits together but there are things I do know -

-The Upside Down represents shame and being othered - whether that's ostracization for being gay (Will), for not being white (Lucas), for being someone with a disability (Dustin), for being an abused super powered kid (El), or a "tomboy" (Max) ..... (and Mike ...??)

-Will gets taken into the Upside Down in season 1 and then consumed by a monster connected to the Upside Down in season 2, which represents his shame in being gay.

-Lovers Lake was initially connected to Mike and Will in season 2 and it's heavily theorized that this will be an important location regarding their storyline, whether that be a sex scene or love confession.

-It's also referenced by Robin as being "the perfect place to hide."

Obviously season 4 answers the question about why the gate was opened in Lovers' Lake - but doesn't it seem odd how these questions are raised? Especially with Will being ever so present despite not actually being in the episode at all?

Anyway. This show will never stop making me deranged. I know this isn't particularly too spicy but I'd rather submit my asks here, where people have a better understanding of the show.

Please note that the purpose of this blog is not to be creepy or to make anyone uncomfortable. That's why I created the #spicy byler tag (I will tag all polls with this). If you don't want to see this blog or anything related to it on your feed, please block that tag. Not everyone is comfortable with this sorta stuff, and that's okay.

[wibble-wobbegong]

What proof are you talking about? Proof about op being a proshipper? Just see their twitter account lol (barbjeanisms). Or search icedmo here, someone made a post about them a long time ago

And I'm just asking you not to call every person who’s uncomfortable with it a homophobe or mega-christian. I said to you why I am uncomfortable with that scene, because it seems to me that you’ll being going after everyone who doesn’t see it or who’s uncomfortable with that. And also for me, I don’t see such a meaning in that scene at all, no matter how hard I try, and no it’s not because I’m into purity culture, and no it’s not because Mike and Will are gay. And I have this thing with many other scenes on the show, and not just with byler. Also, not all minors are like you, I've seen some of them feel uncomfortable when adults talk about relationships between teenagers in a sexual way, but that doesn’t mean they’re homophobic oh my god (Although I know you don't care because I see a lot of posts here about shaming minors because of this) (And no I’m not talking about kiss practice fic) (And it also seems like a lot of the people in the byler tag can’t take other people's opinions)

yes i was asking for proof of what you were talking about in regards to the accusations against someone and i’ll look at it

1. Never said anyone was a mega-homophobe or christian, just that they’re partaking in purity culture

2.

i literally said you don’t have to like it, but denying its existence because you don’t like it is different

3. just because you don’t see it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. if you want an explanation dm me but if you’re just saying you don’t see it to try and deny its existence then i can’t help you with that. happy to help explain that imagery if you’re actually curious

4. being personally uncomfortable with sex/sexual attraction doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be represented. if you don’t want to watch sexual activity, then you don’t have to, but it’s unfair for the show to exclude the gay couple and denies some teens representation. just skip over it

5. okay??? just because some minors don’t want to hear adults discuss it isn’t my problem? those kids can learn to curate their own experiences too and block people discussing things that make them uncomfortable. again, never said anyone was an outright homophobe for being uncomfortable with stuff like that. i’m saying anti purity culture enforces homophobic rhetoric created by our oppressors and people unknowingly buy into that rhetoric because it’s framed under the pretense of “protect the children”

7. when did i shame minors???? this whole thing is in support of teens getting to see themselves on screen and not feel shamed for experiencing sexual attraction. bro what

6. “a lot of people in the by/er tag can’t take other people’s opinions” you literally said you didn’t like it because you had personal issues with it and therefore the experience makes you uncomfortable. that’s not an opposing view point to what i’m saying, that’s an attempt at shutting down the conversation