Based Off Of That One Teen!Stancest + Carla Threesome Comic Where Stanford Is Fucking Stanley From Behind

they chillin like old times

I like to believe, as A.Square got older, he begun forgetting not only what he saw on the third dimension, but also how the Sphere looks like

Based off a conversation with my gal friends

Whatever, go my brainworm

FIDDLESTAN NATION RISE AND SHINE

Happy Valentine’s Day!

i got this ask on my strawpage and was gonna type it up in my notes app and post it to twitter, but i really couldn't figure out a way to say it concisely, so i'm answering it here bc it's prob gonna be long lol.

do i think stancest is actually canon? simply put, no. despite how often i'm like "STANCEST IS CANON!!" i truly don't think that AH and the writers intended stan & ford's relationship to be seen through an incestuous lens.

their relationship is def the heart of the show, second only to dipper & mabel's own bond. they are the center of each other's worlds, their story & character arcs revolve almost entirely around each other, and their happy ending is literally the two of them sailing off into the sunset to spend "the rest of their days" together (ford says this almost word-for-word in journal 3).

but i still don't think all of that was meant to be taken romantically.

in my opinion, where things start to get a little weird is, surprisingly enough, ford's relationship with bill.

the rest is under a cut bc HOLY SHIT this got longer than i expected.

there's no denying that bill was written to deliberately parallel stan in a number of ways, from his mannerisms, to his conman status, to the fact that he calls ford the same name stan did when they were kids.

he's written in a very intentional way that makes him serve as both stan's parallel and his foil, especially in their respective relationships to ford (bill feeds into ford's ego and encourages him to aspire for greatness alone, stan has always been a direct obstacle & challenge to ford's ego, accidentally ruining his chances at WCT & encouraging him to live out their childhood dream together; bill valued infinite power over his own family and destroyed his dimension as a result, stan valued his family over everything, and saved ford and his dimension as a result).

normally, this wouldn't be that big of a deal to a stancest shipper like myself. but as the book of bill & the accompanying website all but confirmed in big, flashing neon lights, ford & bill have a romantic history and are exes.

having the two people closest to ford be compared to one another is one thing. having ford be drawn to bill because of how similar he is to the brother he secretly misses is one thing.

having ford be romantically involved with said character is what makes me raise an eyebrow lol.

again, do i think ford is literally a brocon who's got repressed sexual/romantic feelings for stan?

no.

i do, however, think he has unresolved Brother Issues that led him to subconsciously find comfort in a romantic partner that reminded him of stan (right down to bill calling him stan's nickname for him) in much the same way a person with "daddy issues" may seek out affection & intimacy from someone who reminds them of their father (or is just "fatherly" in general).

that much, i believe, was actually intentional. it's just too blatant to not be lol. it'd be a completely different story if either

bill & stan were nothing alike (untrue) or

ford & bill's relationship was strictly platonic and didn't have any romantic implications (also untrue)

i've said this before, but this isn't just a case of "oh, ford fell in love with someone who just coincidentally reminds him of his brother." bill's use of the nickname "sixer" during their first encounter was a deliberate attempt at appealing to a part of ford that was repressed, vulnerable, and aching, in order to get ford's guard down and make it easier for ford to trust him, and it worked.

billford is a ship that, to put it bluntly, would not exist without ford's buried feelings for stan, even disregarding shipping/incest/etc. ford's desire to be close to stan even platonically is what allowed bill to needle his way into ford's heart in the first place.

and all of this wouldn't be that weird if, again, bill hadn't continued to feed into ford's longing for stan even after they'd established a romantic relationship, by still calling him "sixer" and trying to permanently sever the relationship he had with stan specifically, once he and ford broke up (the phone call he tried to make while in ford's body that was described in tbob).

to put it another way, imagine if wendy was basically an older, taller mabel, or if any of mabel's crushes were eerily similar to dipper. people in the fandom would def take notice and view it as a little strange. so i don't get how people can look at ford dating someone so blatantly and intentionally similar to stan and think to themselves "ah yes, this is normal. ford is completely Normal and definitely doesn't have any underlying issues whatsoever" lmao

to conclude: no, i don't think ford & stan's relationship is actually canonically romantic, nor do i think ford falling in love with bill was incestuous, necessarily.

but i do think that he had a desperate longing to reconcile with stan buried DEEEEEEP down, and it manifested itself in the form of being attracted to bill, which is probably why he never bothered correcting bill's use of the nickname "sixer" since their very first meeting, or ever expressed that it made him uncomfortable.

That post that's like "stop writing characters who talk like they're trying to get a good grade in therapy" really blew the door wide open for me about how common it's become for a character's emotional intelligence to not be taken into consideration when writing conflict. I remember the first time I went to therapy I had such a hard time even identifying what I was feeling, let alone had the language to explain it to someone else. Of course there are plenty of people who've never been to therapy a day in their life who are in tune to their emotions. But even they would have some trouble expressing themselves sometimes. You have to take into account there are plenty of people who are uncomfortable expressing themselves and people who think they're not allowed to feel certain ways. It also makes for more interesting conflict to have characters with different levels of understanding.

When I think about the soft parts of the Stan twins’ personalities in canon and the way they’re buried in layers of toxic masculinity but in very distinct ways, it looks like Stan is more sensitive, while Ford is more sentimental; Stan is more outwardly aggressive, while Ford is straight up more violent.

Stan is definitely more easily brought to tears than Ford, as well as, in my opinion, more easily flustered. He cries about at least (if I’m not forgetting any) four times that we know in the show: at the funeral of the Stan statue, as he watches The Duchess Approves, when he temporarily wins the post of mayor of Gravity Falls, when he says goodbye to the children. (One time in his childhood flashback, too, but I’m giving him a pass because he was just a kid and I don’t fully trust Stan’s flashbacks for many reasons.) In the Lost Legends comics, he also cries twice as an adult: first of sadness, then because he was touched by the little boy’s pick of his book. (One time as a child, too, when he confesses to Ford about his wish to be appreciated by Filbrick, but that arguably doesn’t count.) The interesting thing is that, in the story, Soos comments that he knew those sobs, implying that he heard Stan cry often enough for him to be able to recognize them immediately. And the funny thing is that Stan never, ever admits that he’s crying: he got glitter in his eyes, or campaign confetti, or was simply cutting onions, among other flimsy excuses. To me, Stan is the textbook example of that tumblr post: “I don’t care, I say, caringly, as I care deeply.” No one really buys his facade 😭

Ford, on the other hand, seems to be considerably more stoic. Dipper observes in Journal 3 that Ford finally cries when he loses Stanley, and that it was the first time any of them ever saw Ford crying—just the need to point that out, the fact that everyone was surprised, says a lot. In TBoB, Ford cries after Bill’s utterly terrifying tormet reaches a breaking point. We know he does because he tells us himself that he “wept,” and is not ashamed of it.

The way I see it, a lot of Stan’s macho man masculinity is performative, and exaggerated, as well as his confidence. Stan has a very low confidence, but he acts as if it’s the contrary. Meanwhile, Ford’s egotistical confidence is not faked, it comes from within—I feel like he is so much more secure in his badassery, in his talents and abilities, in his masculinity, that it makes him just act more natural and casual about it. Of course, Ford is insecure too, and has a low self-esteem even as he has high confidence, but his insecurity is rooted in guilt and the feeling of being an outcast, never about his own competence.

Don’t get me wrong, though. Ford’s toxic masculinity is quieter than Stan’s, and very different, but just as present. It’s not performative at all, but second nature to him. It’s mostly about repressing his feelings and being, quote unquote, “distant from himself.” Very highlighted in Dipper and Mabel Vs. The Future, when he tells Dipper to simply not feel fear as if it’s the simplest, easiest thing a human being could achieve, as if you could just turn off that switch in your brain and make a conscious decision to ignore those damn pesky emotions. More than that, he acts as if that’s the right, rational, desirable thing to do.

I think that a lot of fans pay far too much attention to Ford’s nerdy, quiet side and end up assuming he can easily be fit into the softer, more responsible stereotype of a nerd. That is, more of a prude, more easily flustered, the kind of man who would be genuinely bothered by Stan’s swearing. That is not what we see in canon at all. When JK Simmons (Ford’s VA) asked Alex how he should sound, he was told to act “loud and brash”; in Journal 3, Ford tells us that he wanted to give himself up to Bill just to curse him right to his face; he consistently doesn’t shy away from weird or freaky or illegal things, but is casually and shamelessly attracted to them. (Not that I don’t think Ford would nag Stan about swearing. Ford is hypocritical like that.)

Which brings us to the aggressive vs violent comparison I used. Stan acts tough and makes threats, alright, but Ford actually means them. Stan might attempt to punch someone; Ford’s trigger-happy hand goes straight to his gun. His bounty poster in the multiverse warns that he is “armed and dangerous.” I wouldn’t want either of the Stan twins as my enemies, but Ford is the one I’d dread to find in a dark alley, so to speak. Beneath the veener of superficial calm and control, lies the truth that he’s (way) scarier than Stan and willing to go even crazier lenghts to get what he wants, be it a selfish, ambitious desire or the safety of his family.

Still, Ford is sentimental—melancholic, brooding, prone to nostalgia, with a penchant for drama. The way he writes about people in his journal is often very reflective and thoughtful, calling Stan the most selfless man he had ever met in any dimension, or Bill as (formely) the sun in his galaxy. A poetic soul, lover of flowery language.

That makes me think about their interactions post-Weirdmaggedon. I can easily imagine Ford suddenly saying some intense truth about the depth of his feelings for Stan in his most earnest tone and Stan predictably trying to play it off as a joke and ruining the mood but evidently (not secretly at all) melting inside. Don’t start acting all mushy, bro, Mabel isn’t even here 🙄 (😳) (he’s almost crying again and Ford knows it)

Inspired by shmisky's post, here's my redraw of Stan and Ford from the iconic scene from Princess Mononoke. I just HAD to get this one out of my system, I was obsssesseddd

People tend to draw parallels between Ford and Dipper, and Stan and Mabel. So, what are some similarities you can find between Ford and Mabel, and Stan and Dipper?

i made a few posts about how the show kinda parallels dipper and stan, especially in the finales

but imo scaryoke is basically entirely about their similarities, and dipper's series goal was the same as stan's

and off the top of my head their other similarities is them being protective younger twins with trust and anger issues and that the line "who would sacrifice everything for their dumb sibling" is targeted at both of them

meanwhile ford seems to be the more (ironically) trusting like mabel, and they're both prone to tunnel vision

also the puppet funeral scene has ford musing on his similarities with her (but i demand more bonding moments between them dangit!!!)

ford unfortunately downplays his artistic/creative side (damn you stem being perceived as more respectable!!!!) but like mabel he has skills and interests in a bunch of fields (and for examples of mabel's many interests just take a peek at the intros of her shorts lol she's fascinated in so many things)

altho them both liking puppets really stuck out to me

of course they're the authors of the most important books in the show, the journals and scrapbook

and i always thought their grappling and magnet guns kinda felt similar

personally i feel like ford's obsession with his grand unified theory is like mabel's obsession with the fantasy of a summer love, aka something they both ultimately realise they never needed with mabel gaining self-love and her love of waddles, and ford still pursuing his love of weirdness but without needing the validation of others

"Dipper, Mabel, Stan and Ford, they’re all characters who need each other. Without Dipper, Mabel’s just in a fantasy land. Without Mabel, Dipper is just sort of just spiraling into misery, spiraling into his own neurosis and not being pulled into those social situations, not growing as a person."

overall, like mabel, ford needs someone to keep him grounded, while stan (like dipper) needs someone to help lift him up

+ sweater vs sweaty twins

One morning, in the Oregon shack, Stanford, Stanley, and Fiddleford were having breakfast together. Fiddleford brought up a paper he’d recently read, The Evolution of Social Attitudes Towards Homosexual Relationships in 20th-Century America: A Historical Analysis, and shared some of the views it mentioned. For example, gay men might tend to pursue fashionable and personalized styles of clothing and have a higher appreciation for pop music, dance music, and the arts. Additionally, they might show a distinctive social behavior pattern with more frequent and intimate interactions within their social circles.

Stanley: Ha, I always thought men who liked theater were kind of sissy.

Stanford: I think the article oversimplifies things. Just because someone likes art doesn’t mean they’re necessarily gay.

Fiddleford: That’s true, just like being gay doesn’t necessarily mean you enjoy theater. I don’t believe that a gay man’s social behavior can be summarized; there are always exceptions. And those who haven’t acknowledged their orientation haven’t been observed either. They probably just seem like regular people, like you and me.

Fiddleford: Haha, but a guy like Stanley probably wouldn’t be mistaken, right?

Stanley: Oh, no, I’ve been with a guy before. But you can’t tell, right?

Fiddleford: Hold on.

Fiddleford: Raccoons doing the jitterbug! You’ve been with a guy??

Stanley: Yeah, it was a long time ago. We were in high school, and we broke up ages ago.

Fiddleford: Wow… that’s… unexpected, in every way. I thought you were into women; I even saw you flirting with Susan at the diner. Don’t you like women?

Stanley: I’ve only been with that one guy. But I guess gender doesn’t mean much to me—I’m open either way. Sex is just sex; as long as there’s chemistry, it’s fine.

Fiddleford: So, back in high school, it was just about sex? Then I’m not sure that would classify as a gay relationship since straight men do that kind of thing too—sorry if that’s too blunt.

Stanley: No problem, I don’t mind. We’re just chatting. We did go on dates a lot, so I guess we were pretty serious back then.

Fiddleford: So it was a relationship? You must have faced a lot of pressure back then.

Stanley: Yeah, some.

Fiddleford: Who confessed first?

Stanley thinking: I don’t think… anyone confessed. We just ended up together.

Fiddleford: You didn’t talk about it? How does that even happen?

Stanford: It happened naturally, just going with feelings.

Stanley: Lust, that’s what it was.

Fiddleford: Wait, uh, Ford, you knew about this?

Stanford: I did.

Fiddleford: Well, that makes sense; you’re twins, after all. I guess secrets are hard to keep. So, when did you two break up?

Stanley: Right around graduation. He was a good student and wanted to go to college in another city. I didn’t care for school and wanted to work right away. We couldn’t agree, so we just split up.

Fiddleford: You didn’t try long-distance?

Stanley: You know that never works. Thinking that letters and calls can keep a relationship going—that’s a lie told by cowards who don’t have the courage to break up. Right, Ford?

Stanford: True enough.

Fiddleford: Makes sense. Sounds like you’ve thought about this for a long time. So, were you the one who broke it off?

Stanley: No, it wasn’t me.

Fiddleford: Oh… I’m sorry. That must have been hard on you. My first breakup had me crying with my banjo in my room for three days. How long did you cry?

Stanley: I didn’t cry.

Fiddleford: Really?

Stanley: It’s been a long time. Everyone goes through breakups; I don’t care anymore.

Fiddleford: But it was your first love, and you broke up over something like that. It’s a shame. Have you kept in touch since?

Stanley: Yeah, we have.

Fiddleford: And now that you’re both working, you haven’t tried to—

Stanley: —Oh, no. No way. Getting back with an ex is just plain stupid.

Fiddleford: But you were happy together, weren’t you? Honestly, distance isn’t an insurmountable problem, and you didn’t break up because of a loss of love. If it were me, I’d at least try to see if it could work.

Stanley: You’ve got the wrong idea. We broke up pretty badly. But yeah, I still have some good memories.

Fiddleford: Oh?

Stanley: We used to go to the beach a lot. We didn’t do much, just talked. Well, and other things. The beach was right by our town. It was beautiful when there weren’t people around, so we’d skip class and go there in the afternoons. A few years back, when I passed through our hometown, I went to see it. Now it’s a tourist spot, packed with people.

Fiddleford: Skipping class? Didn’t you say he was a good student? Why would he skip class?

Stanley: Yeah, why indeed?

Fiddleford: Right? I mean, with all the homework, studying, and essays, I was constantly busy back then. How did he manage it?

Stanley: Huh, I never thought about that.

Stanley: Ford, how did you manage it back then?

Stanforddrizzling maple syrup on pancakes: Stayed up late doing homework.

Stanley: Ah, so that’s it—stayed up late doing homework.

Fiddleford: Oh.

Fiddleford: Wait, hold on.