[deleteyas]

i come bearing more fruity four behind the scenes photos!!!! via djotime on instagram :-)

[kunikidasssss]

it’s not lost on me that ppl only call steve harrington a ‘well developed character’ (which he is) or ‘the best character in stranger things’ (down to personal preference but deffo a fan favorite) when it’s about his platonic relationships with other characters (dustin, robin etc) or when he’s just by himself. but ONCE it comes down to nancy, it’s all ‘oh they could never work again because xyz happened in s1!!’ …..so his character development is fantastic and great up until nancy shows up, then its all moot. i guess. #noticing

[gradghoulgloom]

"To nothing ever keeping us apart. Cheers!" -Season 5, Episode 8 The Rightside Up

[dufrau]

when that lady at the police station tells nancy "only love makes you act that crazy" after jonathan beats up steve like obviously thats a weird thing to say in general but its also just not at all what happened in the scene? he wasnt defending nancy at all he was defending himself because steve was being an asshole and pushing him repeatedly while he was trying to walk away. it had nothing to do with nancy. the jancy agenda is built on lies lol.

[peanut-butter-bopper]

yeah no cause like the woman didn’t even know the extent of damage that jonathan caused. she hadn’t seen steve. all she knew was that some guy was brought to the station with busted knuckles and a trunk full of weapons. exactly what would that have to do with love?

and on the off chance that she was a seer and could glance into the very depths of jonathan’s tortured soul, the only ‘love’ he was operating on was love for his missing brother, whom steve had insulted to get a rise out of him.

[ccwritesnonsense]

and would you believe that when jonathan said this i believed it. why else would this be in the script? obviously because we were going to get a moment of quintessential steve heroics in the final fight: taking a hit for one of the kids (mike?) that would have killed them but he's strong enough to take, protecting someone (maybe nancy) while they made the big play, being the fastest one to get to point x in time. something that required him to use one or both of his two key strengths (his bravery and his athleticism) to do something that no one else on the team could have done. a job for good old steve harrington. and we the audience would think, "wow, it's a good thing steve didn't fall off that tower, or else so and so would be toast!"

but nah. instead you have steve taking a passive backseat role - something he's never done in all five seasons. offering no leadership skills or experience as one of the most expert fighters on the team. not caring when nancy offers herself as bait. stabbing ineffectually at a gargantuan kaiju beast with a long pointy stick.

i guess that's my bad for expecting the writers to be competent storytellers

[solarismoons]

Nancy: I don’t like the music you listen to! haha! you’re always late! LMAO 😂😂

Jonathan: I fucking hate the thing you’re most passionate about. Your writing is so fucking boring, I want to kill my self every time you force me to indulge in it. Also, I hate everything you wear so I donated your closet.

[peanut-butter-bopper]

didn’t know that when the duffers said “full circle”, they actually just meant “we are going to erase all the development these characters have had and reduce them to what they were at the beginning of the show with no explanation” that’s really cool!!

[peanut-butter-bopper]

there’s actually so many gaping plot holes even beyond the subpar character arcs that i just-

it’s been a good year since nancy graduated by season 5, yes? or at least 6 months i’m not really sure. and in that year, she has killed innumerable military personnel. i don’t know a fucking thing about emerson, but is an unexplained gap year and, more importantly, homicide not a concern? nancy’s just sliding in (and out of) emerson?

i am fully open to someone calling me stupid and pointing out the obvious, because i very much cannot see it. like i’m sorry, but i’m just confused.

[slashergirlnancy]

Steve Harrington // Lucas Sinclair STRANGER THINGS

[breebree10]

soulmates. that’s it, that’s the post.

[peanut-butter-bopper]

insane how in denying steve and nancy a conversation with each other, the writers denied them the resolution of their arc not just with each other, but their individual arcs as well.

because what do you mean the girl who got into this whole upside down business because of her guilt associated with this one particular event never resolved that guilt with the person she shares it with?

and what do you mean the guy who got into this whole upside down business because he loves this girl so very much never even found out if this girl loves him back?

it’s one thing to not let them end up together, but it’s entirely another to pretend they’re not excruciatingly important to each other’s past and future.

[friendlyneighbourhooddm]

me waiting for the Duffers to come out and having to explain that there isn’t an extra episode and the ending is actually just it and they just actually forgot about the plot holes because they had the flu and we have to cut them some slack but that fans are welcome to interpret it that way because it might have happened off screen

[peanut-butter-bopper]

there’s this fic i’m trying to flesh out and ultimately, hopefully begin writing before exam season starts, but i think there’s something i need to address (for my own sanity) before i can have even one (1) productive thought about stancy as individuals and as a whole.

if you’ve seen my blog before, you’d know that i am quite categorically salty about their respective endings. neither of their endings made even the slightest sense to me, unless conformitygate is in fact happening, and that’s a whole different rabbit hole.

nancy, whose arc was about dealing with her guilt, learning how to depend on the people around her, and maybe, for just fucking once, actually communicating her feelings, did not find resolution on any of these fronts.

similarly, steve, whose arc was about rising above the high school status quo, finding his path in life by coming to terms with who he actually is, and leaving the town that is both his cage and his safety net, did not find resolution on any of these fronts.

the only way this shit makes sense to me is if it is deliberate. if this regression to who they thought they were meant to be at the beginning of the show is a subconscious coping mechanism to deal with trauma. if the show was meant to end ambiguously for these characters.

in which case, i am fully for it. historically, steve and nancy are one of the few characters that have this tendency to consider everything their responsibility. nancy, with her guilt. and steve, with his care for the children.

given that neither of these perceived responsibilities have been fully sorted by them, it makes sense for them to be unfulfilled. and to regress to the vision they obviously don’t have for themselves anymore.

nancy, by putting herself onto this path of intellectuality and forced seriousness. and steve, by dedicating himself to more children. literally please just let steve have a meaningful conversation with someone his own age who isn’t fucking jonathan.

steve and nancy having a conversation was so unbelievably crucial to their arcs. and i’m not even talking as a stancy shipper right now. just as a general watcher of the show and someone who cares deeply about these characters.

because for nancy, steve represents the guilt she has been wearing like armour for nearly half a decade. and for steve, nancy is the one person that has ever caused him to have hope or ambition in any sense of the words.

if nothing else, their arcs could not possibly come to a conclusion before they deal with these points i.e. each other.

no closure -> no completion of individual arcs -> regression to past idealisations

thank you for coming to my ted talk

[peanut-butter-bopper]

i don’t think i’ll ever stop being mad about how perfect an example nancy wheeler is of how writers and audiences alike tend to equate female independence with aloneness, and how media has evolved in a way that a woman’s “growth” arc is considered fulfilled only if she ends up alone.

we have never once seen nancy happy when she is alone. i think some people really need to figure out the difference between being stoic and literally just suppressing one’s emotions.

and yes, while i do believe that nancy needs to be alone with herself in various aspects to understand herself better, i don’t think her character development is one that requires her to lack any meaningful one-on-one companionship by the end of it.

all her endeavours to go it alone have been sacrificial in nature. shooting at billy, going to the library by herself (which isn’t sacrificial, per se, but running on the assumption that you won’t be believed doesn’t have a lot of positive connotations), literally offering herself as bait in the finale of the show.

which is why i just don’t see the arc she has been accorded as being a positive thing. this isn’t even about stancy or jancy. i’m just sick and tired of media misrepresenting a strong female as a lonely one.

because tell me why a man’s arc usually ends up with him learning a life lesson and getting the girl, but a girl is only self-actualised if she doesn’t get the guy? as though her being alone is the only evidence required to declare that she doesn’t need anyone?

it’s not about need. it’s about want. she is allowed to want someone, even if- and perhaps especially so- she doesn’t need them. and a woman is allowed to be strong and in love. especially my girl nancy wheeler.

[alltheanswers]

the way i see it, when you're a prisoner in a messed up prison world, you really only have a few doors open to you.

[theeungodlyhour]

season 1 / season 5 NANCY WHEELER (smiling at Steve Harrington)

[bulionzkury]

'i asked chat gpt-' well i asked the duffers and they said its up to my interpretation and also they dont know