Buff Byers This, Buff Byers That, Blah Blah Blah... ENOUGH! What Is YOUR Slightly Ooc Will Byers Headcanon

You really expect me to believe that Will "that has always needed Mike and always will", that doesn't think he'll ever be loved back by him, that has given up on his happy ending because Mike is the only person he sees a future with, that Will can be as happy without Mike as he could be with him?

I'm sorry, I'll be blunt here, but some Byler shippers seem to act as if Will's feelings for Mike are a crush, are passing, that he can be just as fulfilled without having them reciprocated.

And sure, Will just wants Mike's friendship at this point because he doesn't think he'll have anything else, but make no mistake. Mike is the love of his life - the freaking writers have shown that his love for Mike is unconditional, that he's willing to sacrifice everything for him, that he just wants him to be happy even if is not with him.

That's actual love.

I don't see anyway in which thr writers can consciously make Will so unconditionally in love to the point where he dreams about spending his life with him and then suddenly deciding that he'll never be as fulfilled or happy.

I just can't.

This has been sitting in my drafts a bit, so pardon the dustiness and slight incoherence.

My favorite thing in season 1 is how they went about using the boys dynamics to highlight that Mike has special feelings for Will.

So Mike makes the inital call to Lucas when Will is missing, prompting their rescue mission.

But Lucas is the one to officially say they should go searching- even if it is Mike that presents the argument for this conclusion (this also sets up one of Mike's core character traits as being crafty/calculating/manipulative whatever word you want and I love how overtly they show leans into it in s1).

So, we know from this scene that both Lucas and Mike are super gung-ho about finding Will.

This is emphasized again in the woods, when Dustin presents the very reasonable argument that what they are doing is very dangerous/risky. And fails his check to convience them away so completely because Lucas and Mike are both so dedicated to finding Will that Dustin was never going to roll high enough to convience them in the first place.

And just like that Lucas and Mike are put on the same level. And we see that tension snapping and crackling for most of the season in how they both think the other is finding Will incorrectly.

With once again, Dustin as the speaker of reason (and he fails again because these two love Will so much). And fun side note, Dustin focuses on convincing Mike to play nice with Lucas- notnthenother way around because the audience is meant to focus on Mike too because his feelings are different.

We specifically get Dustin's less intense/insane drive to find Will to showcase that Lucas is on another level. Which allows for an even more complex foil with Mike's reaction to a missing Will.

And this isn't to say that Dustin doesn't love Will. He absolutely does and this is highlighted several times- my favorite is that Dustin tries so hard to keep the party together because he is worried their chances at succeeding go way down when seperated is so sweet. (And part of this is because Dustin and Will foil each other so well. Both are more passive and measuring compared to the reactive and calculating Mike and Lucas to keep the party balanced).

"Do you even remember what happened on the bloodstone path?"- Dustin, s1

But it is always Mike we focus on first reacting to Will. It is Mike we follow through the grief and anger at others reactions to Will missing/dead. Lucas is there giving reactions, but he is either second or in the background with Dustin. In fact, Lucas and Dustin are show to be on the same level in regards to distress over Will's "death", as they both tell Mike to "don't do this man." as Mike has a complete meltdown.

And that's the point. Why do we not think Lucas is in love with Will?

He was just as dedicated as Mike to finding Will

Proative enough to even break off on his own, discovering vital info in the process

Was shown visibly upset at Will being "dead" - His shot even highlighted the tears on his face

He even got one of the "heroic" moments at the end of s1 (though not the rescue of our "princess" because s1 was really focused on familial love in my opinion)

He even got the reciprocated hug from Will in the hospital (and Dustin too) not Mike

But Lucas and Will never interact the way Mike and Will do. And Lucas and Will definitely have a close friendship- Will sides with Lucas against Mike (and others) several times over the seasons; and we see Lucas apologies to Will over the ruin dnd campaign- something we know Mike wanted to do (aka apologize for the rain fight) but we never see him actually apologies to Wills face; only Lucas does.

The show makes this huge point about Luacas acting so angry that no one is taking Will's disappearance as seriously as him (kinda like Mike yelling at his family) the entire season 1, going as far as physically fighting Mike over it and literally abandoning the party.

And yet Lucas is not considered as being in love with Will, not like Mike.

Even though Mike spends the season hovering over a girl (which, right move Mike cause I doubt the adults would have figured it out in time without El), and being accused of liking that girl, even kissing her.

So why, even with El as a stated love interest, do we still think Mike is in love with Will?

And it's because we have Lucas to showcase what a super hard-core, dedicated, insane friend will do for his friend.

And Mike is on a completely different level.

i have complicated feelings about the willel being one person theory (like, on one hand, the subtext supporting it is undeniably there, but on the other... i just can't deal with el not being her own person, lol sorry). however, this metaphor still works even if we assume this is a case of an even more extremely mistaken identity, and the one who's right on the money here is actually... argyle.

supergirl aka kara zor-el is clark's cousin, who (unlike clark/kal-el that had arrived on earth as a baby and grew up leading a normal life, save for developing superpowers he couldn't tell anyone about), had remained on krypton after the planet blew up and only left for the earth when the last surviving argo city became uninhabitable due to kryptonite poisoning.

so, while superman was raised as your regular human, supergirl was 15-16 by the time she entered the earth society, meaning she had to start over as an outsider and relearn everything about life. her superhero status was hidden from the society by clark for the time being while she was training to control her powers, so she adopts the identity of an orphan linda lee. during a period when she loses her powers due to some villain machinations, she is adopted by the danvers family and starts attending a high school.

does that remind you of anyone?

while will has some great thematic parallels to clark kent/superman (living a normal life, but having to hide a huge secret about your identity which might destroy everything if it ever gets out), el is a lot more like linda lee danvers/supergirl (growing up in a secluded place that is culturally different from the wide society, having to adapt and learn how to be human).

both kal-el and kara zor-el are kryptonians and have the same superpowers, so could it be that lois lane mistakes one for another? especially when superman is hiding behind supergirl's name, pretending to be just clark kent, her friend.

The Superman Reference

How “on the nose” it is but so many of us missed it

A man with a secret and a disguise to conceal the truth from his love interest…

Superman and Clark Kent

Whenever Superman is brought up in this fandom, it’s usually just pointed out as gay Mike evidence. While I do agree that Mike is in fact gay, I don’t think that’s the only point of the reference. Additionally, Superman is brought up because of dual personas/disguises.

It’s definitely worth noting that Argyle refers to El as “Supergirl” and “superpowered girlfriend” but only Mike refers to El as “Superman”. More specifically, he only refers to El as such in the van scene. He even takes things a step further and compares himself to Superman’s love interest… Lois Lane.

Lois Lane is unaware of who the man is behind Superman (Clark Kent).

In the same scene with the Superman/Lois Lane reference… Will expresses his feelings for Mike… under a disguise!

Clark Kent is Superman’s alter ego. He is Superman in disguise. He is the persona of Superman that allows him to blend in and essentially “hide”. As above describes, he’s passive and introverted… much like…

I must say that, it’s very interesting how for most of Stranger Things, Will and El are not “present” at the same time. When El appears, Will disappears. When Will appears, El disappears. This of course is mainly true during the first two seasons of the show.

Now, even if you do not subscribe to the theories that Will and El are actually somehow one and the same or even to theories that Will has powers… Will being Clark Kent still works.

Much like Clark Kent with Lois Lane, Will has been harbouring a major secret from Mike. His secret of course being that he’s gay and in love with Mike. Though perhaps, he may have other secrets as well. We will just have to wait for ST5 to know for sure.

As we all know, Will is disguising his feelings in this scene. He is “El”; thus he is “Superman” here.

And I think Mike has known a long time… deep down.

Taking a break from my Mike analysis to write out how i envision the painting reveal going

Damn this is therapeutic i swear

i need a mil*ven kiss (hear me out) in the first episode of s5 (hear me out!!) that looks a lot like their s3 kiss (HEAR ME OUT!!!!). i need el to initiate the kiss, but mike not only doesn't reciprocate, he looks undeniably UNCOMFORTABLE. this time, though, el notices and confronts him about it, about how mike really isn't in love with her after all. he never was. it's a statement, not a question, she knows it, and even though mike stumbles over his words trying to explain himself, he knows it damn well too.

ok. look at these.

look. that's the same look. right?

let's take a closer look. to do that, i'm gonna have to zoom in a bit on the first one. because, as you can immediately see, the shots are slightly different. the first is a little farther away, showing both mike and el, walking next to each other, whereas the second is much more intimate, a closeup on mike's expression as he looks at will's face in the foreground. a minor but telling difference about the levels of emotional intimacy in each scene.

so, moving past that first element of contrast, let's look at each shot in full, because in both of these scenes, mike goes on a bit of a face journey before he gets to that final smiling expression, seen above.

personally, i think studying actors' body language and micro-expressions is inconclusive at best, but i won't deny that these look similar. however, it's pretty clear to me that they aren't the same.

toward el, i see confusion, intrigue, maybe pleasant surprise, followed by a glance down (to emotionally process and/or watch his step), and then a nervous but friendly smile.

toward will, i see awe, relief, and overwhelming affection, followed by a shy glance down and a slight schooling of his slack jawed expression into a warm smile.

but, again, that's just my interpretation, and i can't say with any certainty what the intention of all of finn's micro-expressions are. but from my perspective, even a surface level viewing of these two expressions depicts a very different emotional experience. however: there's no denying the connection between these two scenes. they clearly mirror each other, just like a lot of things about mike's relationships with el and will mirror each other. i don't think that's an accident.

whatever you think his sexuality is, mike is undeniably in a romantic narrative with el. beginning in season one episode three, when the concept of their romantic relationship is introduced, the narrative arc mike and el share is heavily focused on that relationship. the first scene above actually happens in that same episode (s1e3), not coincidentally almost directly afterward. and the former scene, with mike, lucas, and dustin behind the baseball field, provides very interesting context for several reasons:

first: bear with me, because we're going back to look at the context behind this context. this is only episode three of the show, but already there's a lot going on, both in text and subtext.

and since we have the entirety of their relationship so far presented to us on screen, when lucas accuses mike of looking at el romantically, we're easily able to go back and figure out where he got that impression: we can examine every time lucas has seen mike look at el at all.

the first night, after finding el in the woods instead of will, and while insisting that the next day she'd be gone and they could focus on will again, mike's behavior is directly reminiscent of benny's. taking el in, and providing her with shelter, food, and clothing.

the next day, after learning that she's in danger and changing his mind about pawning her off on his mother, mike infers that she might know something about will. when lucas arrives, he exclaims that she recognized him and knew he was missing.

later, when lucas tells her that will is their friend, she asks what that means and mike explains. a friend...

and then she displays that she might really be able to help them find will. and mike looks at her like this:

each and every one of these interactions is directly related to will. but lucas, through the omnipresent lens of heteronormativity that surrounds boys' interactions with girls (especially a group of boys who have no experience with girls... more on that in a bit), only seems to consider the fact that mike's behavior, which is undeniably about will, is being directed at el.

throughout season one (and beyond, in more subtle ways), will and el are repeatedly connected to each other through the trope of mistaken identity. will is abducted on the same night (and due to the same series of events) that el escapes the lab. hopper, in his investigation into will's disappearance, keeps running into clues about el. and mike, lucas, and dustin, sneaking out in episode one to search for will, find el instead.

later in the season, hopper eventually realizes the truth of his own more overt mistaken identity arc: while he was under the assumption that he'd been following will's trail, he'd actually been following el's. interestingly, the realization is triggered by one specific distinguishing difference, which tells him beyond a doubt that he's been looking for two different kids: their art.

though much more subtle (aka hidden in the subtext), mike's arc with his feelings about will and el follows a very similar pattern. the main difference, though, is that in season one, the swapping of places is eventually reversed but never acknowledged as such, and mike ends season one with el now missing and will back in his life, but a lingering sense of something yet unresolved.

second: (i'm not going to deep dive into this one here, because it's a whole analysis in and of itself, but i need to mention it because it is relevant) this scene introduces the recurring motif of superheroes being directly connected to mike's feelings for el, which is an association we see follow them all the way into season four and become a defining metaphor for their incompatibility.

third: lucas is the character who first introduces mike's romantic feelings for el into the narrative. and instead of giving any indication that lucas' interpretation is correct, mike's reaction is... difficult to read. his response is immediately defensive, both verbally ("what are you talking about?" "shut up, lucas,") and physically (leaning away and shielding himself when lucas hugs him). we can infer from the original character descriptions why mike might be defensive about this subject:

obviously, this description is only a vague impression of what Mike Wheeler became, but it's clear that the core elements of his character outlined here did come to fruition on screen. here, mike's insecurity is linked both to the bullying he undergoes, and to his inexperience/ineptitude with girls. and it's presented as key to his character motivation (the original concept of his character arc put forth here is very straightforward: at the start, mike has insecurity centered around bullying and is romantically inexperienced. by the end, mike has courage against monsters and romantic experience.)

in any case, this scene is the first hint of this aspect of mike's character in the show itself (the earlier scene of bullying in the show focusing on mike consoling dustin over what he’s being bullied for (“i think it's kinda cool. it’s like you have superpowers or something!”)... see my last point here… mike holds the idea of superpowers in high regard, and they are consistently connected with his feelings about el. something about the mistaken identity through-line feels apt here: mike mistakes his feelings of admiration for el as feelings of romance.) in this scene, mike is confronted with both romance (in direct relation to himself for the first time in the show) and bullying.

but due to the way this is shot, it's impossible to get a read on what mike is truly feeling. it reminds me a lot of another scene, actually...

in both of these scenes, mike's genuine emotional reaction is hidden from us. in the first, lucas forcibly hugs him, teasing him about how much he "loves" el, and in effect introducing the idea of el as a romantic prospect to mike. in the second, el hugs mike tightly, her hand still around his neck from their kiss and his arm trapped in between them, similar to the way he shields himself from lucas. we're then shown that he's signed the card on the flowers squished between them "from, mike." hm. so... not love, as lucas suggests.

we come to learn over the course of season four that this is something mike is actively struggling with: his inability to "love" el in the way that she wants, expects, and deserves. this scene, introducing that season-long arc, conceals mike's true emotional state and motivations from us, again, mirroring the first introduction to their entire romantic plot line way back in season one.

(an aside: lucas' "if you love her so much, [then] why don't you marry her?" aka the inciting event of their romantic arc, is a based on a conditional statement with the hypothesis that mike loves el. as mr. clarke might posit (in, say, season one, episode one): what's the difference between an experiment and other forms of science investigation? ...well, an experiment is a controlled test of two or more variables against a hypothesis. does that remind you of anything happening in mike's romantic narrative? something about...... [murray voice] experimenting sexually?)

anyway. then, after extracting himself from el's embrace, mike finally drops his bag(gage) and opens his now empty arms to will, before preemptively cutting himself short with a punch to the shoulder.

...did someone say internalized homophobia?

and then immediately upon being introduced to argyle, mike is called out for his presentation here not being genuine. ("it's a shitty knock-off,"/"i really thought it was ocean pacific...") we're being told that something about mike's performance is not what it seems (and may even be a case of one thing being mistaken for something else).

and speaking of homophobia...

fourth (and finally): this scene, of lucas' teasing mike about his "love" for el, which i'll remind you again is tied directly to lucas mistaking mike's behavior regarding will as being solely about el, is quickly interrupted by an onslaught of homophobia, during which mike is specifically targeted (read: tripped) by the bullies.

the juxtaposition is immediate and obvious: mike's friends lovingly teasing him, even embracing him, over a crush on a girl vs. bullies maliciously taunting them about will being killed for being queer and then physically harming mike.

(there's also something to be said about the later scene in which these bullies force mike to drop his bike in the woods and chase him to the edge of the quarry, mirroring exactly how the cops assume will must have died... and, to be clear, i'm not saying that mike himself is being bullied for being queer in the way will was. no, mike's queerness is invisible to those around him in a way that will's isn't, so his relationship with it and the ways it affects him are hidden in subtext.)

which brings us directly to the following scene in the woods. el asks about mike's injury (sustained from the aforementioned bullying, thereby linking these two scenes even more concretely) and with a little prodding ("friends don't lie"), he opens up to her about what happened, and about being bullied at school. she listens, tells him she understands (this also follows her recent flashback of brenner's abuse in the lab), and they share a "cool," "cool," and a smile.

so... let's quickly jump over from here to the van scene with will. something similar, yet notably different, is happening in this scene, leading up to that infamous smile at the end. mike is sharing his insecurities with will now, but instead of will prodding him to open up, mike, prompted only by will's "she's gonna be okay," begins rambling so much about his insecurities (while speaking in superhero metaphors) that he eventually cuts himself off, saying it's "stupid." instead of letting him brush it off, will guesses exactly what mike is afraid of: "you're scared of losing her." he gives him The Painting (a symbol of his love for mike) and a long speech about feeling lost and different, while insisting upon mike's value (you're the heart, leading us, inspiring us, etc). and then they share a "yeah?" "yeah," and a smile.

so we can see the similarity in the way the shots are set up, the progression of the conversations, and mike's visible reactions. but we can also see distinct differences, all of which together inform a significant difference in emotional weight between these two scenes.

while mike's conversation in the woods with el takes place in the third episode of season one, at which point mike has known her for less than 48 hours, the van scene is in the second to last episode of season four, and is the fourth of five heart-to-hearts mike and will have this season alone (and following three previous seasons and beyond that years of close friendship). it is also arguably the climax of their shared arc this season. on the other hand, mike and el's season one moment is part of the introduction to their storyline, and the introduction to their romantic arc. in this moment in the woods, mike is looking at el romantically (did you think i was gonna argue that he isn't? because no, he definitely is). in fact, this is the beginning of mike's entire romantic arc, which sets out to address the foundational insecurity that is key to his character. we, as an audience, right alongside mike, have just been told (by lucas) that mike has romantic feelings for el. and then we are presented with this scene. we are supposed to view this as romantic. because mike is starting to view it as romantic.

had stranger things been one season long, then the climax of their romantic arc would have been the kiss they share in the cafeteria, followed by the denouement of el's symbolic death (the gay implications of which i could write another whole essay on...). but the end of season one was not the resolution of mike's full romantic arc. by the nature of the five act structure (which is what stranger things has, being five seasons), the entirety of season one serves as exposition for our full narrative. which means, in effect, that the entire arc of mike and el's season one relationship is there to serve as groundwork, a foundation for mike's complete five season arc. season one, starting from before he even meets el, all the way through to when he eventually kisses her and then loses her, is only act one of that arc. the first act of five act structure is when the driving conflict is presented. so in the context of the entire show, for us as the viewer, mike's narrative arc surrounding the romantic aspect of his insecurity begins with his season one "romance" with el.

and we know that this insecurity is an element of the full five-act narrative, rather than being presented and wrapped in the course of the mini "self contained" narrative of season one, because we can see plainly, three seasons later, particularly during mike's heart-to-hearts with will, that this insecurity has not yet been resolved. we know this, on a basic level, from having watched mike and el's relationship struggles progress, but it is still explicitly laid out for us in season four. and will is consistently the only person who genuinely hears mike out, encourages him to open up, and addresses his insecurities, instead of brushing him off, like most other people in his life (including will at some points) have done. will understands him in a way el only claimed to in season one.

looking back to the character outline: mike has now "kiss[ed] a girl" and even "had a girlfriend" and still hasn't resolved his insecurities even remotely. in fact, after the first season arc wraps up, this romantic relationship becomes the main source of that insecurity. his difficulty navigating a real romantic relationship with el is the basis of their arc in season three. and by season four, mike is consciously struggling with being unable to tell el that he loves her. despite will's reassurances that things will be okay (which stack onto lucas' constant relationship advice in season three), mike keeps circling back around to it. because he can't move forward on the path he is on.

he has reached a point of no return, like a “fight you can’t come back from.” he is unable to find the security he is searching for in his romantic relationship with el... and this is where we arrive back at the van scene with will.

if the scene in the woods marks the beginning of the introduction of mike's romantic arc, then the scene in the van marks the beginning of the conclusion of mike's romantic arc. if the introduction of his romantic arc (season one) presents his insecurity, then the natural conclusion of that arc (season five) is security. throughout season four, mike lays out for will the insecurity that his relationship with el still brings him. he is unable to find that security with el, and, in the van scene, finds it with will instead.

or, should i say, begins the journey to finding it. because, especially after the lie that brings them into that moment, and then traumatic pizza dough freezer incident, we're still at the beginning of the conclusion. there's still a lot to resolve, but season four (alongside mike, who now understands what he's been going through) finally began moving the subtext of mike's arc into the actual text. and this moment indicates that season five will take that next step to fully, textually, actualizing it.

so, getting back to the parallel we're looking at here: each of these scenes is a catalyzing moment in mike's romantic arc. in season one, when lucas suggests that mike has a crush on el, and then what follows is a conversation with el where she is (to quote lucas) "not grossed out" by him, he actively begins his journey toward resolving this character motivating insecurity. he looks at el and he sees the possibility of romance.

and just look at him. he looks excited. hopeful. a little nervous. but... i want to remind you again: mike has known el for less than 48 hours at this point. this is the first conversation they've had in which they've related to each other as equals. for their entire relationship before this and afterward, outside of their romantic interactions (and also. often. disturbingly. concurrent with their romantic interactions...), mike's role has been as el's protector, a makeshift father figure, the elliot to her E.T. here, though, el tells mike that she understands him.

in season one, mike is twelve years old (read: pre-pubescent). he has no personal understanding of or experience with romance. dustin starts to comment in s1e2, "you're letting a girl...?" and ted later scoffs "our son with a girl?" and outside of the queer coding, what we can take from both of these (which draw back to the original character description) is that mike has no experience with girls whatsoever. (outside of, you know. family. but that's not what this post is about.)

and again, this scene happens almost directly after lucas first introduces the idea of romance between them, both to the narrative, and to mike himself, who, very significantly, up until this point, has shown no romantic interest in el. the sequence of these events is not a coincidence. 1. lucas assumes mike has romantic feelings for el. 2. el and mike have a moment of personal connection and understanding 3. mike "boys only" wheeler puts these two together and assumes the connection between them must be romance. but the expression on mike's face here isn't a representation of already existing romantic feelings. there's no basis for those. again, this moment represents for mike the potential for romance.

which... makes his expression in the van scene hit even harder. because unlike el, will isn't a stranger he barely knows, but rather his best friend of ten years. and it isn't lucas telling mike how mike feels. it's will professing his own feelings about mike, in direct response to mike's self-professed insecurities. (ding ding ding, are your alarm bells going off?) mike's expression at the end of this scene, if we're viewing it as a reprise of his season one expression, is a representation of hope for his romantic future. but this time, heading into the resolution of mike's romantic arc, with all of the knowledge and context we (and mike) have gained over the course of the past four seasons, it's directed at will.

ok. so. with the basic connection between these two scenes established, i'm gonna move a little bit sideways here. at the end of their romantic arc in season one, el disappears from mike's life and will reappears in it, effectively swapping their places (remember that we've been dealing with the mistaken identity trope between these two), and leaving the question of mike's romantic security glaringly unresolved.

and we know why - this is a five act narrative we're watching - but just within the context of the season one arc... the climactic moment of mike finally asking the girl to be his sister kissing the girl was preceded by her locating will in the upside down (leading to his rescue) and followed by a resolution in which she disappeared... and will took her place. at the end of the season, mike is left in the same place he started: playing games in his basement with will, his first attempt to resolve his arc of romantic insecurity, with el, ultimately ending in tragedy.

after season one, this arc picks up again, but this time will is the one present in mike's life. and mike's behaviors toward el in season one, during which they were undergoing a romantic story arc, begin showing up again in his behavior toward will. but unlike with el, mike's particular (read: romantic) behavior toward will happens without outside intervention, and in fact, often in spite of outside intervention. now, this isn't to say that all of mike's behavior with el was a result of others' influence. when el reveals to mike that she is on the run from "bad people," mike is immediately protective and caring toward her. however, as i've already explained, this caring behavior (which, again, we know right off the bat is not romantic because it directly mirrors the way both benny and hopper care for her) doesn't turn into romantic behavior until lucas introduces that idea.

on the opposite side of the spectrum, right from episode one of season one, mike's behavior toward will is fully self motivated, even in the face of opposition.

and as we move through season one and beyond, we can see that mike continues to rely on constant guidance in the way he cares about el (particularly and most consistently from lucas).

stranger things is, at it's horror filled core, a coming of age tale. like many of our other characters, mike's full character arc, romantic and otherwise, is about self-actualization. from the very conception of the show, his insecurity is presented as a central character flaw to overcome, while also being directly linked with his romantic fulfillment. the overcoming of this fatal flaw, the resolution of his romantic arc, and his final achievement of self-actualization are all inextricably intertwined.

the reprisal of this specific expression of romantic hope as we enter the end of mike's romantic arc is not an indication that mike is in the same place emotionally at the end of season four as he was at the beginning of season one, just with a different person now. instead, it is an indication of his romantic arc coming full circle. mike began in a position of hope for his romantic future with el, only to have the actualization of that hope (their romantic relationship) gradually degrade his romantic fulfillment and self-esteem. the longer mike and el are together, and the more serious their romantic relationship becomes, the worse mike's insecurities become. this is, i would argue, directly related to the fact that mike's pursuit of a romantic relationship with el is not due to his own genuine desire, but instead a combined result of heteronormativity (lucas assuming mike's feelings for el to be romantic), compulsive heterosexuality (mike's subsequent assumption that his feelings for el must be romantic), forced conformity (mike's attempt to resolve his insecurities firmly within these heteronormative boundaries, under the assumption that a rejection of these boundaries is unacceptable), and the trope of mistaken identity that has been following will and el since season one.

and of course i don't know with any concrete certainty what season five will contain, but based on the narrative so far, and optimistically expecting a satisfying resolution to his character arc, the actualization of his romantic hope regarding will is going to lead to true romantic fulfillment and coincide with his self-actualization (a big part of which is coming to terms with his sexuality).

now, i'm not going to conclude this whole analysis by saying, "and that's why mike is gay!" because while i think this all is a good indication of that, based on all of the context and my impression that this narrative is being presented in a way that focuses on the subtext and deeper symbolism of each of these relationships rather than being a case of specifically el vs. will, you might still have a different interpretation than me. that's fine. however, i am going to end by insisting (me when i argue with the wall), based on everything i've laid out, that this parallel and others like it (ie parallels between byler & miIeven's romantic arcs) are not evidence of mike's feelings, specifically whether they are genuinely romantic or not. this parallel serves as a narrative device in his romantic character arc... the conclusion of which is mike realizing and coming to terms with the fact that he is actually in love with will, and not el.

just to be very clear, i'm not saying these parallels alone are proof against mike being bisexual, but i am saying that they are not evidence in support of his being bisexual. again: they do not indicate that mike is romantically attracted to el. what they indicate is that will and el are foils in mike's romantic arc.

before i finish, i want to address a couple misconceptions:

1. the fact that mike actively and willingly participates in a romantic relationship with a woman means he can’t be gay. this is straight up homophobia. gold star bullshit. no.

2. mike and el being presented in a romantic light means that they have genuine romantic feelings for each other. this is a misconception of the way narrative tools are used to tell a story. going right back to my first point: it is an irrefutable fact that many gay people have romantic relationships with the people of different genders (read “the opposite sex”) before they come out/realize their true sexuality. it is also a fact that many of these gay people fully believe their feelings to be genuinely romantic before realizing that they are not. as i've already gone over, mike is twelve years old when his romantic arc begins. on the surface, his relationship with el is presented as romantic. he participates in (and even initiates) romantic behaviors because he believes that his feelings for el are romantic. in seasons one and two, mike is one of our main POV characters. we can see a romantic tilt to the way some of their scenes are shot because, to mike, while they are happening, they are romantic (keeping in mind what i said before about mike having no experience and therefore no personal knowledge informing his perspective, AND keeping in mind that many of these on-the-surface "romantic" scenes are also consistently subtextually linked (read: paralleled) to familial relationships for both of them... and i haven't even touched the cultural context surrounding homosexuality in 80's. there's so much nuance informing the way this story is being told). and we, as the audience, are supposed to read them as romantic on first viewing, because otherwise the season five plot twist, revealing the truth of mike's feelings, would not work.

it is not a coincidence that the active degradation of their romantic relationship (outside of all of the other context, parallels, symbolism, family coding, etc, that are there to hint along the way that things are not as they might seem) begins full force in season three, at the exact point when the two actually enter a real relationship for the first time, and also when our characters are entering puberty, the time during which a person's sexuality (in a general sense, but also in regard to sexual orientation) begins to fully emerge. after his season one arc with el, mike underwent another season-long romantic arc: this time, with will. it's more subtle, because (i believe) mike doesn't realize yet that it's romantic, but it's there. then at the end of season two, mike makes a choice: he encourages will to dance with a girl and he dances with el, re-writing their tragic ending from season one, but now leaving his romantic arc with will frustratingly unresolved, again mirroring the sense of unresolution from season one: mike has swapped out the end of each romantic arc with the wrong love interest.

and then in season three, now having had the experience of both romantic arcs, and now, for the first time, with both will and el right there beside him, all we can see anymore is the overt contrast between the two relationships, depicted most blatantly through the same type of visual and narrative "parallel" we've been looking at here.

but at the end of this season, instead of making a choice, mike's choice is made for him. he has a romantic moment with will, and then el kisses him, confusing the resolution of these two romantic arcs once again.

mike's season four arc closely mirrors his season one arc (searching for one love interest with the other by his side, mistaken identity trope abound), but with important distinctions: 1. mike is a little older, a lot more experienced, and has a better understanding of both the context of romantic relationships and the scope of his feelings for both el and will. and 2. mike's only real guidance in season four comes from will, and he doesn't simply listen and act based on will's advice, as he did with lucas' in seasons 1&3. now, he fully engages with will's input, pushing back against it when he doesn't agree, and accepting it when he can acknowledge its truth (up until, of course, our fourth (and hopefully final) tragic, incorrectly resolved ending). mike is finally taking control of his romantic narrative in a way he hasn't previously, and the direction it's heading in now is toward security, self-actualization, and will.

so the point of all of this is: nothing is as simple or straightforward as it may seem on the surface. the narrative has always been deeply complex and layered with subtext and symbolism. and most of all, when interpreting the meaning of anything presented directly to us on screen, context matters.

also uh. yeah, mike gay

oooh that leak about mike calling el a cleric..... once again the wonder twins are doing their favorite trick: switching places

it might be not a bad combo but i'm afraid i'm not ready for that yet 💔 so the threat of tuna yogurt and hot sauce for lunch is enough to get me to reblog :D

(sorry i feel awfully awkward about tagging anyone 😭 but moots feel free to reblog if you want lettergate to be canon)

 A friend threatened me to repost so I will!

Basically, there r tons of fake asses on tumblr who just want comments and followers, so someone started this to see who's actually a good friend. Everyone I tag better repost (and tag other people and preferably threaten them in a creative way as well) bc I'm high on caffeine and newfound lesbianism and will resort to violence.

@ey-theys-was-coronas

@fangirlhehe

I would tag more people but they're the only ones I've really interacted with-

Will and Mike shouldn’t say ily in s5 because when ST couples say it things never end well for them, for example look at Stancy! and look at Lumax who never say ily and only kissed once because actions speak louder than words and kissing isn’t one of those actions, and look at Mileven! IT’S BONES GUYS!! Plus we shall not forget the “I didn’t say it.” “You didn’t have to.” because THAT IS LITERALLY BYLER IN A NUTSHELL AND THAT’S WHY THEM SAYING ILY JUST DOESN’T SIT RIGHT WITH ME OK? SO HEAR ME OUT: lots and lots of “This is crazy”, “It feels like I’m going crazy”, “We’re crazy”, “You’re crazy”, “You make me feel like I’m going crazy” etc ETC BECAUSE “Well they say it makes you crazy” AND “Blank makes you crazy” AND “Only love makes you that crazy” AND “Wiwbgctwgctr?” “Yct.” THANKS FOR COMING TO MY SLEEP DEPRIVED TED TALK!

Sternberg's Triangular Theory of Love + Stranger Things Couples

This is very different from my other posts on here, but I was inspired by @hawkinsschoolcounselor to make this. Just wanted to give this tag some of my own insight from a Psychology student's perspective, specifically talking about the Triangular Theory of Love (TTL) in relation to couples (whether they are platonic or romantic or not) on Stranger Things. I'm not here to say that the Duffer Brothers specifically took inspiration for their couples from this theoretical model, just that this is one of the many theoretical models of relationships that can be applied to how people view love. Therefore, a writer would have written real life people's experiences of love into the show.

(Just want to quickly add -- this theory was made in the 80s. The most common criticism of this model is that it is made on the basis of westernised ideals of love. It also does not take asexuality or aromanticism into account.)

First of all, an Introduction to the TTL:

Imagine yourself a triangle. Every triangle has three sides. Each side of this triangle is an essential component to love. It’s the combination of these elements that creates the different types of love we experience.

First, we have Intimacy, which isn't your classic physical intimacy that you know (e.g. hugging, kissing). It's basically the emotional side of love. Can you tell this person your deepest secrets? Can you trust them? Do you two have similar interests? Can you have a laugh? Intimacy is what makes us feel understood and accepted for who we are.

Next, is Passion, which is the fire, the spark, the physical attraction that ignites the magnetic pull between two people. The chemistry, the electricity, you could say. We feel this at the beginning of most relationships, that intense desire to be with someone, emotionally and physically.

Lastly is Commitment. This is the decision to stay, to continue even if something changes. This can be for various reasons like investments you've made in the relationship, the promises you've made to someone.

Each of these components are associated with a certain type of love.

Nonlove -- This relationship has neither intimacy, commitment, or passion. You are acquaintances with this person.

Liking -- This relationship has intimacy only. This is a friendship, without commitment or passion that a romantic relationship has.

Infatuation -- Only has passion. It's exciting, overwhelming, but there's no emotional connection, trust, or commitment.

Empty -- Only has commitment. The relationship is stable and safe, but has no real connection or passion that it may once have had or never had.

Companionate -- This relationship his intimacy and commitment, but it does not have passion. This could be a very close friend, or a couple that may be in love but do not have physical attraction to one another.

Romantic -- You are intimate with this person and have passion with them, but you are not yet committed. For example, a partner that you've been dating for a short time.

Fatuous -- The presence of passion and commitment, but without intimacy. For example, two people who barely know each other can get married super quick on a whim.

Consummate -- Is the 'ideal' love. This is the complete, balanced love we all strive for. It’s a mix of deep emotional connection, physical attraction, and a strong, lasting commitment.

So how does this relate to Stranger Things?

I do believe we can sort of apply these definitions of love to many different duos in ST, and see what this means for them in the future. Love can also be different on either side, for example, on side of the duo may see passion in their love, while the other side sees none.

BTW you may notice that I'm not going to include Byler or Mileven in this first list, I will diagnose them after all the other duos in the show. So scroll down if you want to only see them.

Nonlove

This would be a duo from ST that really has no interaction with each other. No commitment, no emotional connection, no physical connection. I guess we can just pick people who've barely had an interaction, like Steve and Will. Eddie and Hopper. Mike and Robin (not yet anyways).

Liking

E.g. Joyce and Murray, Mike and Lucas. Just friends, but they are friends enough that they have believable closeness and an understanding of one another. More examples include all the party's friendships with each other (except Mike and Will). I don't want to really dumb them down into not being committed toward each other, but we can see that they're not dependent on each other in a way that's got more emotional depth than some other platonic duos in the show.

Infatuation

The only notable one that I can think of here is Stancy, more specifically on Nancy's side. This means she only has passion with him, aka, physical attraction. She's not intimate with him (in this model's definition at least). This model's definition of intimate means sharing deep secrets and trusting each other. During S1, Nancy's reason for being with Steve was because he was popular and she was just excited to be with the most desire guy in high school. She didn't confide in him about her emotional turmoil, she didn't understand his decisions and he didn't understand hers. In S2, this is the same. The only time that she confronted him was when she was drunk, other times she didn't feel he understood her enough like Jonathan did.

She also wasn't committed to him, which makes sense, because she had a far more emotional intimacy with Jonathan.

Empty

The first one that comes to mind ^. Obviously, this isn't necessarily fully in line with the psychological definition of 'Empty love', because Karen is not fully committed to Ted in S2 or S3, but ultimately she does make the decision not to cheat on her husband because of her commitment to her family. They have no intimacy and no passion (Ted's bed is literally downstairs). This is one of those relationships where people don't even have to ask why they don't get a divorce -- because they're too committed, which is their downfall.

Companionate

I believe Steve and Robin are different to those friendships in the 'Liking' category. They have intimacy, because they confide in each other and understand each other on a deeper level. But they're also committed to each other in a way that the other platonic duos don't have. They go where the other goes -- (they always need to have the same job together), and other people already think they are a couple (based on heteronormativity but also because they're seen together so often). They obviously have no passion, because uh well, their physical attractions lie elsewhere.

Romantic

I couldn't think of anything that just fitted only intimacy and passion and no commitment, most of the couples on ST basically have commitment if they also have the other two.

Fatuous

Without intimacy, but only commitment and passion, this is a super rare kind of love, and probably not represented in Stranger Things. If anyone has any idea of what could be in this section, please let me know.

Consummate

The ideal love, with intimacy, passion and commitment, is luckily represented by most of the canon couples in Stranger Things. This is how you know that the writers are good at writing believable romances -- you don't need the characters to explicitly state that they are in love for you to know, because they have all three of the staples for an ideal love.

Jancy has intimacy because they can tell each other secrets and they understand each other's emotional traumas (Jonathan understands Nancy's trauma surrounding Barb, for example. As a wise man once said, they have shared trauma). The biggest reason why they definitely have this love to me, though, is because the moments that they have the most trouble in their relationship is when one of these sections breaks down. AKA -- intimacy was broken down in S3 when they 'don't understand each other' anymore, and they were able to come back from this, showing their commitment. Season 4 also shows their commitment, because while Nancy was being sweet talked to by Steve (ugh sorry), she still stayed committed to Jonathan, same on Jonathan's side. Despite being in a different state, he still made all his decisions based on her future as well as his, showing they were committed.

Jopper has intimacy because she feels that he understands her more than anyone -- he met her in high school and clearly have both shared memories and shared trauma. They trust each other with sensitive information about each other's lives, and are able to confide in each other when the other is going through something. The commitment is shown deeply in Season 4. Joyce's commitment is quite literally shown in almost crashing in a plane for him and trying to break him out of prison. Hopper's is the plan he makes to break out and go see her. Their passion well.... that is also shown in the way Hopper continues to pine for her in S3, giving her longing looks, but also in S4 because this desire has a pay off.

Okay so now we can talk about which categories Mileven and Byler fit into:

Mileven and Byler

Lets' start by looking at each of the three components:

Mileven's Intimacy:  In the beginning of Season 1, Mike has emotional understanding with El, but this is gone by the time Season 4 rolls around. She explicitly states to him "No. You don't." He also finds no time to express his insecurities about his relationship with her actually with her, instead choosing to confide in Will about his insecurities. On El's side, she chooses to lie to Mike about having a really hard time in California, because she does not have the intimacy with him to feel like she can confide in him. There is a reason for this, obviously, and that is because she feels insecure about their relationship. But instead of communicating that, she chooses to ignore it. When Mike finally chooses to tell El about his 'feelings', even if they are true, he is only spurred on by Will alone, not by his own desire to do it. Whenever Mike tries to actually tell El what he's feeling, he ends up trying to do it in other ways in order to avoid it. Their scenes where they're about to open up to each other are either interrupted or extremely frustrating.

Byler's Intimacy: Will has always chosen Mike to talk about his problems with. He says to him in the 'crazy together' scene that Mike can't tell the others because they won't understand, showing that they have a unique kind of intimacy. Will also chooses to confide only with Mike about his problem with D'art in S2, because the situation is slightly icky (because D'art was literally inside him ig) and trusts only Mike with this situation. This is the same as the situation at the end of S4, where Will knows it would be scary for anyone else to hear, but he's happy to tell Mike about Vecna being alive. Luckily, Mike is ready to jump into action at the drop of a hat in both situations. Mike's intimacy with Will is the sheer amount of heart-to-heart scenes they have in S4. He's always ready to tell Will about his relationship problems, but not El (and no, not just because she's in the lab). He's more comfortable around him than El. All Mike and El do is make out (in S3), have some slight banter, but they don't actually have any shared interests. Mike and Will both have the shared interest of all things nerdy, and Mike finds Will's artwork moving and amazing. Mike has been shown to have an appreciation for what Will creates.

Mileven's Passion: I guess it's slightly awkward to talk about this kind of stuff with either Mileven or Byler, because they are teenagers. But teenagers obviously experience physical attraction and desire. The reason we can see this desire is because they have a lot of build up. Jancy have desire because they've been kept from each other because of Steve and Nancy being together. Jopper have been kept from each other because of Joyce's relationship with Bob and her grief, then Hopper being kept in jail (though that's not to do with romance). Lumax have been kept from one another because of Max refusing to get help from others. There was no pining, desiring moment with Mileven. And I know what people might say: Season 2 and Season 3 had moments where they were kept from each other and it was shown that Mike wanted her back. Oh? You mean the Mike that gave up on calling her and focused on Will until El reappeared again? You mean the Mike that joked around with Lucas after El broke up with him and played himself as the victim? It's not the same, because it has no pay off like the others. The maybe-pay off is the 'passion' of them making out in S3, constantly getting interrupted by some funny old guy haha!. As Hopper said, too much passion is 'not normal, not healthy'. This passion has Mike pulling her hands away from him and is just presented as humour/puberty-ridden teens figuring themselves out. Idk man

Byler's Passion:  Ignoring the fact I feel so weird talking about this, let's just reiterate some of the points I brought up to you in the last paragraph. All other main couples in ST have had a moment of unambiguous pining. Jopper, Jancy and Lumax. This is also the case with Byler, clearly, from S4, Will's pining for Mike can be seen as him wanting something. Have you seen those longing looks, marked by sweet, pining music? Those scream attraction, even though some of you might be allergic to two teen boys showing attraction to each other but are totally fine with 13 year olds making out. Those are just Will's pining moments. I mean, I can talk at length about Mike's slip ups. The triple take? The amount of lip glances on this man? It's hard to say at the moment whether they have passion in this relationship, but the thing is. We don't need to have it right now. All we need to know is that there is potential for it, potential for an amazing pay off where Will confesses his feelings. And from the amount of pining Will's shown (and Mike in a lot of ways), there definitely is potential.

Mileven's commitment: So this is where they actually have something. But that's not necessarily a good thing. Mike is the first person that treats El well after being stuck in an abusive lab for the first 12 years of her life. He made a promise to her that he would take care of her, and they both stress that Friends Don't Lie. They don't want to lose each other. Mike tells Will and El that he doesn't want to lose her and wants her to need him. This is not the same as romantically loving somebody. Mike's feelings shift during S2 and S4, but his commitment to El overrides everything. El wants to break up with him because of various reasons, and says that he is her 'first boyfriend' during S3. But they still stay together despite the troubles in their relationship, showing that the commitment is not something they want but something they need in order to feel secure. We have established they have no intimacy, we have established they have no passion. So why do they stay together? Because of the security, or some other reason. We have seen that Mike doesn't love El during S4 because he describes 'explaining himself' to her, while also not knowing what to say when she spells it out for him. We have seen how Mike treats El poorly, and the other way around. They lie to each other, they don't confide in the other. But they stay together because... they've made a promise, a commitment. Mike says I love you because she's going to die and believes it's what she wants. Even if this commitment was supposed to be genuine and pure, it can't be worth rooting for without intimacy and passion.

Byler's commitment: Will states many times that he will always be Mike's friend, always need him, wants to be with him for the rest of his life, playing games in his basement. That is the most obvious sign of commitment I have ever seen. He is so committed that he is willing to sacrifice his own feelings in order to make Mike happy, effectively tying himself to his love forever. Mike is committed to Will in his own way. He is always the one to apologise and take the fall in their arguments, while with El he is not committed in that way. When Will is away from Mike, he's worried that he's lost him. Basically this means Mike is afraid that Will isn't as committed as he is to their friendship. It's funny because Will has the exact same worries during the Rink o Mania fight. But that's the irony. They are both committed. Mike's commitment despite the distance is shown through his fear of losing Will. Will's commitment to him despite the distance is through his painting. No matter what, Mike is always ready to be a team with Will and work with him. Even while they were supposed to be fighting, Mike confides in Will. And Will? A huge part of Will's arc is his undying commitment towards Mike, which makes his scenes with Mileven so upsetting -- because we know his love will never end, meaning his sadness won't end unless Mileven break up.

So what's the diagnosis?

Mileven: Empty Love (Only commitment to each other. There is no show of emotional understanding and connection. The passion and pining for each other is not shown like with other ST couples.)

Byler: Consummate Love (Has all three elements. Both have a mutual understanding to each other's needs, both have a mutual pining, even though it's much easier to see on Will's side. Both have a commitment to the other in their own way. All other popular ST couples have this love and would fit in with Byler's)

Im so scared to post this because it's so different from my other posts. But hopefully you see that even if Byler is not endgame, Mileven being endgame would not be a true show of 'love defeats all' -- because it is not a healthy love.