tree @3ofcabin6 - Tumblr Blog

Internalized Homophobia and Compulsive Heterosexuality in Stranger Things, and why they are NOT applicable to Mike Wheeler

Due to the length of my response, I have opted to make this its own post rather than a reblog. This is a topic that I have wanted to discuss for a while now, so it turned into a bit of a TED Talk. In addition to being long, I don't want it coming off as targeted or confrontational by directly responding and commandeering the whole post.

Nevertheless, the behavior in this screenshot is inexcusable and needs to be addressed, so to get that part out of the way...

First of all. It is INCREDIBLY rude of you to call into question-- let alone blatantly deny-- a real, human person's identity like this. I don't think I even need to go into why that's not fucking cool. If you wanna get into the topic of internalized homophobia, you should maybe examine your own a little bit, starting right there. Any ignorance on a deeply nuanced topic like this is not reason to doubt the legitimacy of a queer/LGBT+ person's identity, period, and neither is something as harmless as an opinion or interpretation of fiction... so with that in mind, I'm not going to go out of my way to doubt yours.

What I will say, though, is it's pretty clear to me that you and many others in the community have a SEVERE misunderstanding of those phrases and misuse them constantly.

I'm going to try and explain it as thoroughly and as neutrally as possible here, because this is something a lot of younger generation LGBT+ kids should understand. Please bear with me.

Since it appears to be important to you that the speaker must have quote unquote "queer status" for you to listen, let me preface this with a fact about myself. I am a bisexual woman. I was in a relationship with a feminine-presenting genderfluid partner for 5 years. I am a millennial, right on the cusp of gen Z. I grew up in a Catholic household. Though I did not face direct homophobia until adulthood and my family/the people around me were not outwardly bigoted towards the LGBT+ community, it was enough of a subtle, underlying issue (mostly a product of the times) for me to know what I am talking about.

Here's what internalized homophobia actually means.

Internalized homophobia is broadly defined as negative and/or hateful perceptions of homosexuality and queerness that are normalized by society and internalized to the point where it becomes a fact of one's reality. In a gay individual, it causes internal conflict, self-loathing, etc. The deeply internalized kind of prejudice is the most common form, to be honest, and it's the hardest to combat because it's so often unconscious.

However, it is important to note that "internalized" prejudice is not exclusive to the group that has prejudice against them. Straight people can experience internalized homophobia. Cisgender people can experience internalized transphobia. Men can experience internalized misogyny. Etc. You can have preconceived notions about a kind of person or lifestyle that reflect negatively on your mindset and cause aversion to certain behaviors that may align with stereotypes, and it can still be a kind of bigotry without blatantly saying "I hate ___, they should burn in hell". With that in mind, yes. The majority of characters in this particular work of fiction likely do have some level of internalized homophobia, purely due to the setting (LGBT+ acceptance is a VERY new thing. Seriously).

It's clear to me that the definition you (and probably most people) are referring to is the kind of internalized homophobia that occurs within a non-straight person specifically-- negativity directed inward-- and that which has detrimental effects on their mental health as a result. This form of prejudice is much more widely discussed in LGBT+ spaces as of late because it's an aspect of the experience that can easily go unnoticed, and make self-acceptance difficult (thus, I see why that may sway the connotation of the phrase in general conversation).

Here's how it actually manifests. (Will, Robin, Troy, Billy)

The VAST majority of instances that showcase internalized homophobia come from Will. (Because... guess what... it's genuinely a key factor of his character.)

"I am [a freak]" - self-deprecation and self-hatred

"I'm not gonna fall in love" - complete rejection of romance rather than acknowledging that part of him

"It's not my fault you don't like girls" - interpreting Mike's wording as a direct jab at his insecurity rather than what Mike actually meant (more on that later), and spiraling as a result

"girls don't play video games"/"girls go to science camp?" - projecting his disinterest in girls or relationships with girls as being a result of them lacking common interests or skills that he values, and actually pushing forward internalized misogyny -- this is why gay+misogyny and lesbian+misandry are a common pattern to accidentally fall into; these internalized prejudices go hand in hand. For example, from the perspective of a closeted lesbian: instead of accepting "I just like girls because I'm gay", it's easier to double down on "I prefer to hang out with girls because men suck. Plus if I express dislike towards men in general, at least then people might stop bugging you about getting a boyfriend, right?" So the cycle continues.

Robin:

"my whole life has felt like one big error" - mindset that there's something wrong with how she's wired

"I don't think you'd even want to be friends with [me]" - projecting the assumption that her sexuality is a deal-breaker if anyone finds out

Troy— now hear me out:

fixation on "gay" as being the ultimate insult, repeatedly bringing it up - projection. There isn't enough evidence or characterization to say for sure that Troy is homophobic out of personal insecurity, but he is a prime example of what it looks like when someone overcompensates.

There is also the factor of authority figures pushing the rhetoric: "it's what my dad says... he says he was probably killed by some other queer."

We see that same pattern of projection forming much more explicitly in flashbacks of Billy: lashing out and using the same language his father used against him.

If we venture outside of Stranger Things, Rick Macy from BBCThree's In the Flesh is another example of that outward projection and overcompensation due to self-directed internalized homophobia. [spoilers ahead]

For context, the show is essentially about rehabilitated zombies. The zombie affliction, "partially deceased syndrome," and the resulting prejudice is a direct allegory to marginalized groups such as LGBT+, people with disabilities, or racial minorities. In the case of the main character, Kieren, the focus is much more on LGBT+ as he is canonically gay and develops a romantic relationship with another man; it is heavily implied that Kieren being in a relationship with Rick and hearing of his death during active military duty is the reason Kieren committed suicide (and subsequently rose from the grave).

Rick's father is an extremist, so we see much stronger denial and projection from Rick than we do from other characters. Despite very clearly suffering from PDS himself, he acts as if he isn't-- eating and drinking even though he physically cannot digest it properly, going out with his father on a hunt to kill other untreated individuals and joining in on the laughing and extremist rhetoric, even when directly in the presence of others like him.

Here's why Mike Wheeler does NOT display behaviors that would indicate that he experiences internalized homophobia towards himself.

Mike has insecurities, 100%. His insecurity stems from being a "nobody", being helpless, being unheard, having no impact on anything or anyone. He feels he is incapable of helping/saving anyone he cares about. That is consistently the main focus of his character struggle and a huge factor in his motivation.

Socially, he is ostracized for being the "lame nerdy kid" at most, but that's not something he ever fights against-- he knows he's a nerd and unpopular, and he never tries to be anything but himself. He's not nearly as confident in it as someone like Dustin, for example, because being an outcast definitely causes him to feel quite a bit of loneliness, but Mike has never expressed that he feels like he shouldn't be the weird nerd. So even if being a socially-ostracized nerd was in some way representative of queerness, Mike seems to be pretty comfortable in it-- at the very least, he's self-aware and not making any efforts to deny it. Most claims that Mike is in denial due to internalized homophobia hinge on the idea that he isn't self-aware enough to realize it, so that argument really doesn't hold water.

In addition, there is no indication that his family or any other adults in his life would be actively homophobic. We only see that attitude from Lonnie and Neil (Billy's father), and that's clearly stated/shown to have affected both Will and Billy. The Wheeler family is complacent in society and quietly follows the mold, but their sociopolitical stance on LGBT+ matters is never mentioned or even hinted at. With no active push-back from authority figures or constant microaggressions, there's no reason to believe that Mike would have developed internalized homophobia and a denial complex. If anything, the Wheeler household is probably the most welcoming and non-judgemental environment for the party, and that is clearly passed down to Mike. (As a quick side note, since I see this assumption getting passed around a lot, too-- it is very true that Mike has some complex trauma stemming from his parents and home life, but it is neglect, not direct abuse. There is a very distinct difference.)

If we revisit the S3 fight scene between Mike and Will and his line "It's not my fault you don't like girls": On its own, you might interpret this as projection (as I imagine many do). However, with the full context of the exchange, it's clear that Mike is only lashing out because Will is insulting El. Given the track record, calling El stupid is definitely the quickest way to rile Mike up and get him to start throwing hands; he will always jump to her defense immediately. So… yeah, he got mad. However, intent behind that particular line is likely something closer to "it isn't fair to bash us and our girlfriends for spending time together simply because you aren't also interested in dating." He realizes immediately that his choice of words was kind of piss-poor, and goes on to elaborate— their interests and priorities are not always going to perfectly align, especially now that they're growing and changing, and expecting everyone to cater to his wants and needs alone is short-sighted and unfair. (Which… is completely valid, mind you.) Because it is a sensitive subject for Will, and the usage of "you don't like girls" specifically pokes a nerve, he is understandably quite hurt by it. Grappling with growing up and growing apart from his childhood, his friends, and familiarity-- as well as the tensions that arise in his relationships from him clinging too hard to the past-- is the bigger picture for Will in his long-term arc, and that was the point of the scene. Mike's words here did not come from a place of malice.

Here's how Mike is, in fact, one of the most open-minded characters and has shown almost zero prejudice in any capacity, inward OR outward.

He's the first person to push back against the bullies when they're bashing Will. He's the first person to speak up in support of Dustin when the bullies are mocking his condition. He doesn't shy away from being gentle and affectionate with his friends-- there's not a single "no homo" bone in this boy's body. He's the first person, in NUMEROUS instances, to be empathetic towards El regardless of how strange she is, regardless of how differently she communicates, regardless of the fact that she's a girl (and according to middle school boy logic, letting a girl spend the night at his house is hella taboo, so…). He needs to be reminded that prejudices are even a thing. It doesn't occur to him that people would think a girl with buzzed hair is weird and out of place, it doesn't occur to him that she would be bullied for something like the intellectual gap between her and her peers. He's just not the kind of person to hold biases like that, not even against himself. Mike's open and accepting nature is exactly why characters like Will and El are comfortable with him. Will said it himself that Mike makes them feel seen and understood.

Mike is a very heart-on-his-sleeve type of person, very vocal about how he feels, and a very bad liar. If he did struggle with internalized homophobia, we would have heard about it by now; it would have been presented directly in the same way it has with canon queer characters like Will and Robin. And he would not have been capable of lying to El about it for this long-- not when a little white lie about why he can't visit tripped him up as much as it did, and certainly not when honesty is something El values so highly.

Here's what comphet actually means.

Comphet is the same thing as compulsory heterosexuality-- it's the abbreviated form. It refers to the idea that heterosexuality is the presumed default, and also refers the societal pressures to adhere to that standard, which may lead to LGBT+ individuals to suppress same-sex attractions and pursue hetero relationships. It typically also results in them leaning harder into general heteronormativity and gender roles/stereotypes as compensation. As you might expect, it goes hand in hand with internalized homophobia and often leads to resentment and a deep discomfort in the relationship.

Comphet is more often discussed in regards to women, but men experience this phenomenon, as well. Due to the combined social pressures of heteronormativity and sexism, they can manifest differently in women versus men-- typically, women will internalize and shrink in on themselves while men overcompensate with performative displays of masculinity. It varies greatly from case to case, obviously, but for the sake of brevity, we can narrow it down to the simplest distinction.

Here is how it actually manifests. (Vicki, Billy, even Lucas)

A perfect example of heteronormative conformity is Billy. The shiny car, the weight-lifting, the smoking, the pinup posters of women all over his room, constantly picking up girls for meaningless flings, even flirting with older women-- these are all very blatant displays of stereotypical masculinity. He makes being sexy and manly his whole personality as a way of suppressing emotions (read: "weaknesses") that would get him called a pussy or the f-slur by his father and peers. Billy's sexuality is not a topic the show's narrative goes into, but there's subtle things that might hint toward it-- his father's blatant homophobia, for one. When compared to the subtext surrounding Will, it's fair to assume there is real subtext here as well.

In The Flesh's Rick has a similar outward expression of himself-- pinup posters of women and cars around his room, drinking, going to the shooting range with his dad (despite literally dying during military service...).

Another character that could potentially be interpreted as displaying performative heterosexuality (in general appearance/behavior rather than in practice through relationships) is Lucas. In S4, Lucas has begun to distance himself a bit from the party and joined the basketball team, specifically as a means of changing the way others view him. In his own words, he does it to avoid being excluded or bullied by his peers. He's definitely a much milder case, but it's still worth considering if we are to assume that general social ostracization is meant to be an allegory for queerness (which is a claim I have seen going around quite often)

The closest to a comphet relationship we see in ST is Vicki and her boyfriend. The show makes a point to build tension between Vicki and Robin, where both tentatively acknowledge the hints that are dropped. Regardless of if she's a closeted lesbian or bisexual, the show makes it quite obvious in their epilogue scene-- with the peanut butter on peanut butter sandwich metaphor, especially, but also in Vicki's dialogue-- that she is suppressing her attraction to women and was unsatisfied in her relationship with her boyfriend. Comparing her brief venting anecdote of her relationship to her behavior around Robin, it's clear that she feels (even subconsciously) more relaxed and open when talking to Robin.

Here's an external one: Dani Clayton from Haunting of Bly Manor. [spoilers ahead]

Dani is a perfect example of someone in a comphet relationship that is deliberately canon. Dani is canonically a lesbian. She and her childhood best friend, Edmund, grew up together and got lumped into a relationship because of heteronormative assumptions. Edmund fell in love with her, and she went along with it because she felt obligated to and was too afraid to let him and his family down, especially since they were more like a family to her than her own mother. On the surface, it was a perfect case of childhood sweethearts; he was a kindhearted boy and she loved him dearly, she just very slowly grew to realize that she could not reciprocate his affections the way he wanted her to.

What we see of Dani while in that relationship is someone who is extremely closed off, often visibly dissociating, wracked with guilt. Judging by Edmund's anecdotes, he was always the one to initiate the romance, even when they were young, and Dani would just silently let it happen around her. It even got as far as a wedding engagement before she came out to him and called it off. That conversation resulted in an argument that immediately led to Edmund stepping into a road, getting hit by a truck, and passing away. Throughout the show, Dani is haunted by him-- both literally and metaphorically. She can't look at herself in the mirror without seeing him. It tore her apart and she couldn't even exist in her own skin from that guilt, let alone process the trauma of his death. She felt trapped by him, alive or dead, regardless of the fact that he was her best friend and was always good to her.

Here's why Mike Wheeler does NOT display comphet/heteronormative behavior in a generalized sense

Mike is far from traditionally masculine. But more importantly, he never tries to be masculine. I could write another lengthy essay about how Mike's character flawlessly shatters gender norms, especially in the context of media. Like I've pointed out before, he is kind and compassionate, isn't reluctant to be gentle or vulnerable, and wears his heart on his sleeve.

There is not an expectation for a boy of his age and social status to have a girlfriend. When Mike and El first show signs of romantic interest, as early as S1, he is still the middle school nerd. Being a popular womanizer like Steve or Billy is nowhere near what is expected of him, and as I've said, he's never made an effort to conform to popular kid standards anyway.

Here's why Mike Wheeler's relationship with El does NOT align with comphet behavior, nor does it make any sense narratively for them to be comphet

Mike and El are not a public-facing couple; for the majority of their time together, El's existence is a secret. His peers don't know about her. His parents only know the bare minimum, they never see her. Who exactly would he even be performing for? On top of that, she is not conventionally feminine or "normal" in her appearance and behavior-- at least not when they first initiate their relationship. In the eyes of society, she would be a huge target for more ostracization. With all this in mind, El would be a very poor choice for a comphet mask if that was his only reason.

If Mike was dating El purely out of obligation, whether it be from societal pressures or just because El has feelings for him, we would see him being avoidant or emotionally closed off around her (or in regards to her, when speaking to other characters). The exact opposite is true; Mike is extremely open and vulnerable with El, and is never reluctant or ashamed to be around her or show affection. The only exception is when he was threatened by an authority figure, and the thing he was threatened with was being separated from her again. (Before you bring up the "L" word as a gotcha, I have made a few separate posts explaining aspects of that plot point in detail. Mike making a grand confession was purposefully delayed to build suspense for the climax of the season, as well, so bear that in mind.) Mike has never doubted or called his own feelings for El into question. His insecurity in his relationship stems solely from his deep sense of unworthiness.

There aren't any external forces pushing for them to be together as a couple. In fact, it's usually the opposite. Either by extraneous plot-relevant circumstances (such as El being kept a secret in S2 or long distances in S4) or by other characters projecting/dealing with their own personal issues (such as Hopper and Max in S3), something is always getting in the way. In the end, though, they always run back to each other of their own accord.

Mike and El's relationship is about two lonely kids connecting with someone who sees them and loves them for who they are, strangeness and all, and never giving up on them. It's going against the current, finding solace in fellow outsiders, choosing to be happy together even though they would be criticized and misjudged. It's love always persevering despite the world forcing them apart. Love is a lifeline that transcends time and space. These are all themes that have been deeply intertwined with the central narrative of Stranger Things since the beginning. Mike and El's dynamic is built entirely upon trust and understanding (another huge theme). Separating them, especially on the basis of a lie, would be detrimental to the show as a whole, not to mention disastrous for Mike's character.

Internalized homophobia, heteronormativity, and compulsory heterosexuality are very real and valid reasons why a closeted person might "act the part" and be in a hetero relationship, and even believe it's right for them. Figuring out your sexuality is a messy process with a lot of varying steps, especially when it's socially taboo to experiment or even self-reflect on the subject. However, it's not the catch-all excuse that people think it is. Mike Wheeler, in his personality and his behavior and the things he is fundamentally built upon as a character, does not align with those particular struggles. In actuality, he almost directly contradicts such notions. Parading this "explanation" around as undeniable truth speaks to a deep misunderstanding of Mike as a character, so much that it feels like willful, deliberate mischaracterization that is only done in an attempt to justify shoehorning a ship into canonicity. I have seen the "evidence" many times, and it always reeks of confirmation bias.

Could issues like denial stemming from internalized homophobia arise? Could his sexuality evolve as he grows as a person? Of course. Self-discovery and sexuality are fluid things, and in the IRL sense, there's no right answer. These are valid struggles that anyone is capable of grappling with, and you are free to headcanon or explore them all you want in fanon. (I, for one, have always been a bi!Mike truther, and there isn't much that can convince me otherwise!)

HOWEVER, in the context of the Stranger Things narrative, this is not a character arc that they are applying to Mike. In the context of where the story is taking this character, internalized homophobia and compulsive heterosexuality are not relevant plot points. If they were, there would have been many more, much clearer indicators (consistent with the amount of subtext we see for other characters) that these issues were important to Mike's character journey.

Stranger Things is not subtle in its storytelling. The simple manner in which the story's themes are presented is a key part of the nostalgia factor, because 70s/80s Hollywood blockbusters were not subtle either. Realism and subversion do exist in the narrative, including in characters like Mike, just not where you think it is.

PS, Will Byers' place in the story and the purpose of his dynamics with Mike, El, and the other characters are discussion points that I would love to delve into in another post at another time. I have a lot of thoughts about his arcs and a lot of love for him as a character, both in-context of the narrative and out. I respect the hell out of the Duffer Brothers and all the other writers for how they've handled their queer characters-- making it an aspect of their identity but not the only defining personality trait, and a prominent piece of their story but not the forefront of their character arcs. It's a healthy balance you don't see very often.

PPS, if you are looking for good queer and queer-positive media with supernatural/sci-fi elements, I highly recommend the aforementioned shows In the Flesh and The Haunting of Bly Manor (as well as other shows by Mike Flanagan, such as The Haunting of Hill House, Midnight Mass, The Fall of the House of Usher, etc). Bly Manor and other Flanagan series are on Netflix, and as of writing this, you can find In the Flesh on Amazon Prime Video. If you like doing deep analysis into symbolism and such, you'd REALLY enjoy them!

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

tree