Medlock

♡

[meddiemight]

You can pick nearly any scene from the show and immediately find like five easter eggs and hidden metaphors and symbolism for byler. Whether intentional or not – the duffers had everything laid out for them. It was perfect. The fact that they threw out the most amazing set up pains me so deeply.

[meddiemight]

Will's pov of ttmd;ttms would be so devastating because he obviously still has a crush on Mike. He's still in love with Mike. He'd spend every waking moment justifying their touches and caresses by saying it's "just a game" and if it's just a game, he should play right? So he touches and kisses Mike all over and everywhere except his lips, because that's too tender, too loving. Friends blow each other and hump each other as a joke but they wouldn't kiss each other, letting proof of their love spill between the corners of their mouth. That's not what friends do.

That's what lovers do.

And Mike isn't Will's lover.

[meddiemight]

Yeah.

[meddiemight]

The feeling of being the first ao3 work in a (potential) fandom. The first Tumblr post about it, one of the first few to read the source material and also being one of the first people to draw fanart of it.

ANYWAYS GO READ "The Boy Who Lit Up the Star" BY 'M.B. Nik' RIGHT NOWWW

[meddiemight]

OmgomgomgomgthreehoursomomgomgomgomgomgthreeTHREEHOURSthreehoursongomgomgomgogmogmgogmogmgkgmgkmg

[meddiemight]

Since some of yall on these apps get so confused:

"I don't ship byler because I prefer other ships more/it's just not my cup of tea/I ship them with other characters" - NOT HOMOPHOBIC

"I don't ship byler because that's disgusting/it would ruin the show/it's not realistic/can't two boys just be friends...etc" HOMOPHOBIC

Byler shippers won't call you homophobic for not shipping byler unless you say homophobic shit.

[meddiemight]

Thinking abt mwtfdydgate

[meddiemight]

A little scene from my upcoming byler fic !!!!

[meddiemight]

Joyce, Will's literal mother who loves him to the moon and back, who would, and has, crawled into the depths of hell for him, and her reaction to Will's powers:

Meanwhile this mf:

[meddiemight]

But can’t he have a happy ending without Byler? Like do you really think that if we saw him fully healed, living life to the full, out and proud with an epilogue boyfriend surrounded by friends and family that isn’t a happy ending? Like who is saying it’s either he’s with Mike or he’s destined for an unhappy ending?

Let me put it this way:

Will Byers, a boy abused, scorned, possessed, sa'd, and bullied for being gay in the 80s falls in love with his best friend.

Instead of giving him the happy ending he needs, they stick him with with underdeveloped side character to give a half-assed ending to what could have been a beautiful, hopeful arc that would inspire other queer people who grew up as hopeless as Will did.

Let's not lie to ourselves, the main characters of the season have been revealed, and other than Derek there have been no confirmed new characters. This means that Will's "epilogue boyfriend" would be someone completely insignificant with no development or significance to Will as a character.

Plus, you expect me to believe Will is going to just....discard his feelings for Mike?

Mike is the only person Will feels completely safe around, even when possessed, he only called for Mike.

Mike makes him feel like he's not a mistake at all.

The boy's been pining for years.

Yeah. No.

Will is a romantic, and he's a romantic character.

"I'm not going to fall in love."

Having his arc end by not proving himself wrong would be horrible.

[meddiemight]

So according to anti-bylers.....Will's gonna get abused his whole life, get sa'd, die, possessed, used for murder, almost sacrifice himself, get left behind by his friends, and have to push the love of his life towards someone else....

And he's still not going to get his happy ending....in a show....for outcasts.....?

[meddiemight]

Me when I remember that El asked Mike if he would be like her brother before they kissed after only knowing each other for six(6) days and that's not normal 12 year old behavior....

[meddiemight]

The BIGGEST and I mean the most prevalent argument in any place where even people who consider themselves to not be GA bring up for why Byler is unreasonable is that Mike doesn't reciprocate Will's feelings and actually loves El. They say that Bylers are scrapping for subtext when Mike doesn't even have to be gay for anyone to sympathize with his story, a nerd with bad attachment issues, coming up in a time of conformity where he has to be the ally that his friends need when all authority figures would rather dissuade him. Mike has show no signs of being interested in Will in that way and if Bylers can't see that what Mike and Will have is a very strong friendship built up for childhood, with a lot of history and Mike is just naturally expressive and emotionally forward, then they don't see it. Mike might have a lot of emotional intimacy with Will but that is just from their strong friendship and emotional comfortability that comes with years of knowing each other and is only platonic, it doesn't have to be more than that and there have been no signs that it is more than that. Mike has shown romantic feelings for El, even if they lack the emotional intimacy in later seasons.

Let's debate:

1. "The BIGGEST and I mean the most prevalent argument in any place where even people who consider themselves to not be GA bring up for why Byler is unreasonable is that Mike doesn't reciprocate Will's feelings and actually loves El."

This is true. The GA and mileven shippers often disregard the possibility of Byler because "Mike doesn't love Will, he loves El," which, surface level, makes sense.

But Stranger Things, again, isn't real life, it's a story, and in a story, everything happens for a reason.

If Mileven was meant to be the most lovable, relatable ship, why did they make the writing choices that they made in season 4? Let me explain:

If Mike was really supposed to overcome his inability to say I Love You to El in a way that represented a healthy relationship, the writers wouldn't have made it so that, instead of dealing with the situation by confiding in El herself, or someone like his mom or even Lucas(who's in a very good relationship), Mike confides in Will, his best friend who's in love with him.

It's hilarious when people dismiss Byler even though this very fact is right in their face. Why make us root for Will? Why make Mike confide in Will, knowing that Will is in love with him?

2. "Mike doesn't even have to be gay for anyone to sympathize with his story, a nerd with bad attachment issues, coming up in a time of conformity where he has to be the ally that his friends need when all authority figures would rather dissuade him."

No character needs to be gay to be able to sympathize with them, that's besides the point. Having a gay character is simply pivotal for representation, it's targeted to a specific audience to make them feel seen and heard.

Despite Mike being a nerd, there is nothing genuinely abnormal about him that would cause him to be bullied – he's from a comfortable upper middle class family, has a sister with a good reputation, and has a nice big house. In the 80s, hell, even now, people would look past the nerdiness because of his background.

The attachment issues apply, and make a good amount of sense.

Having "being the ally all his friends need" be one of Mike's primary concerns makes sense, but is also counter-productive. This is a problem that every character has, all of them have to be each other's allies and all of them are facing the same threat. Making something everyone's going through a primary issue for Mike wouldn't do him justice as a main character.

3. "Mike has show(n) no signs of being interested in Will in that way."

Then explain this:

A) upon reuniting with Will at the airport, Mike makes no moves to hug him despite clearly missing him (it's canon that he attempted to call and Will wouldn't answer because of Joyce). Instead, he hugs him awkwardly, so awkwardly you can even see El making a confused face in the background. Why?

B) In season 2, Mike called El and tried to reach her every single day. But, despite knowing that she was alive, he made no attempt to look for her, contrary to him looking for Will in season 1 even though he literally saw his body being pulled from the quarry. Mike even stops his calling of El the moment Will is in danger, and instead stands as the only member of the party that stayed with him throughout his possession.

Why does Mike stop caring for El when Will gets involved?

C) The obvious tension-filled moments in season 4: the van scene, the bedroom scene, and more. You cannot watch those and tell me to my face that that's a normal, bro-to-bro convo.

And so much more....

4. "Mike is just naturally expressive and emotionally forward, then they don't see it."

You're right, Mike is emotionally forward and naturally expressive – you could even say that he wears his heart on his sleeve. You can't deny that he acts rather strange around Will, and considering his emotional forwardness and blatant facial expressions that never lie, you start to wonder what he feels for Will.

5. "Mike might have a lot of emotional intimacy with Will but that is just from their strong friendship and emotional comfortability that comes with years of knowing each other and is only platonic, it doesn't have to be more than that and there have been no signs that it is more than that."

Emotional comfortability is one thing, this is another. I'm not dismissing it, it's actually very important to Mike and Will's relationship. In season 2, Will lists of the names of people who he says 'baby' him, Mike isn't listed as one. He also tells Mike the secret about Dart and his feelings of 'going crazy' and even emphasizes that he thinks 'the others won't understand'. He only trusted Mike with this.

Similarly, Mike felt comfortable enough to confide in Will about his relationship with El.

But there's a limit as to what can be played off as platonic.

To put it into perspective, let's replace Mike and Will with Lucas and Dustin: two people whove known each other for a very long time and are seen to have emotional intimacy.

Would Lucas ever do this with Dustin?

Or this?

Or....

It would be weird, right? If Lucas couldn't hug Dustin, if he kept looking at Dustin's mouth. It would be weird if they had a flirty conversation in his room....

But when Mike and Will do it, it's "just platonic...?"

6. "Mike has shown romantic feelings for El, even if they lack the emotional intimacy in later seasons."

So, you admit that the couple that's supposed to be the "flagship" of the show, the couple that everyone praises to be the best, lacks emotional intimacy in later seasons? Does this not....alarm you? Why? Why have they started lacking in emotional intimacy?

It's not even just emotional, it's physical too, there were only around two scenes in the entirety of season 3 and 4 where El and Mike where openly physical with each other. Before which, they'd spent the entire season apart (season 2).

But why? The Duffer Brothers have proved time and time again that they're amazing at writing love (eg: jancy, lumax, jopper....) so why would they fail the main ship of the show?

Because love fades, love is confusing, and love is hard when you're under the pressure of "growing up" and "getting a girlfriend" in a conformist town in the 1980s.

[meddiemight]

One of the biggest anti-byler/pro-mileven arguments I see is:

"It's just not realistic, the show takes place in the 80s!"

Which, in real life, makes total sense. If you were a gay kid in the 80s your chances of finding love were likely in the negatives – even worse in a small, conservative town(like hawkins).

But, Stranger Things isn't real life.

Stranger Things is for the outcasts, the people who never quite fit in, and this much is confirmed. Have you ever stopped to look at your heroes?

1. Will, a bullied, abused and poor gay kid.

2. Dustin, with cleidocranial dysplasia, and a divorced, single mom.

3. Lucas, a black kid in a small town.

(And these boys are science nerds, too.)

4. Max, a freshly moved in tomboy girl from Cali. Who was abandoned by her step-dad, abused by her brother, and now lives in a van with her two-time divorced single mom.

5. Joyce, a divorced, single mother working through even holidays just to provide.

And so many more.

Do you think any of these people were treated decently in the 80s? No, they're outcasts. They're nobodies. And the show makes this very, very clear.

Let's look at relationships:

1. Jancy: a girl from a comfortably rich family and a boy so poor he started working at 15(maybe even younger).

2. Lumax(Mucas): an inter-racial couple, something unheard of in small towns in the 80s.

3. Jopper: two middle-aged people, both divorced and poor, finding love when others would say it's too late.

4. Rovickie: two girls loving each other despite everyone being against them.

None of these couples are standard, none of them are what society at the time would have deemed 'normal'. But they broke free in the end. They got their happy ending.

So, why is Byler unrealistic? Why can't they have their happy ending?

[meddiemight]

I loved drawing tiny spider-men they're so cute

[meddiemight]

[meddiemight]