#byler subtext

[gayofthefae]

It's the same face. Guilt.

The fact that being left alone for 30 seconds to think about El's safety Argyle talked about leading him to look over at Will is already suspicious. But guilt.

Where was I when she could have been dying?

[michaelinprogress]

soldier, poet, king

[gayofthefae]

The way the subtext varies from "I didn't say that/how do I convince you" 'NO! neverrrr' to "okay now that's bullshit and you know it"

mike lying vs mike telling the truth

"You think I'm a monster too."

*high pitched, animated facial expression* "What?!"

vs

"What about us?"

*firm, but quiet. solid eye contact* "What?"

"Yesterday. The way you looked at me. . .you were scared of me."

*head shaking, rapid blinking* "No, no- *scoffs* that's not- that's- that's not true."

vs

"What, you're mad that I didn't talk to you? Seems like you've made it super clear you're not interested in anything I have to say."

*firm, solid eye contact, no stuttering* "That's just not true."

i still can't believe people called finn a bad actor because of this

FINN WOLFHARD??? BAD ACTOR???? PUH LEEZ

MIKE is a bad actor, not finn

[sade-alicious]

im currently rewatching stranger things for the sole purpose of analyzing camera angles, blocking, lighting, and whatnot, so here’s another little thing i noticed

this scene. when jonathon and joyce call out for will and the camera cuts to an angle from inside castle byers. castle byers where will was hiding. this scene foreshadows that will was right there the entire time by showing his perspective. especially since the entire scene jonathon and joyce were shouting his name, but at the end joyce yells “where are you,” when he was right where she looked

also just imagine we open season 5 and its this scene from will’s perspective. will hears joyce and jonathon calling out for him and he tries calling back, but its useless as he hears their voices fading away

[teambyler]

YES Mike eating fruit on pizza was a gay metaphor

I saw a comment saying that Bylers are delusional for finding gay subtext in the "fruit on pizza" scene. We're "overanalyzing" things, they say!

Thing is, that's not the only gay metaphor WITH FOOD that is in Stranger Things. Remember this?

Any LGBT+ person has to react to this the way I did: haha that's a gay joke! "You can't have two of the same thing together"!

And then Robin gave her the jar of jelly, which gave it new meaning:

Vickie was just rambling about her ex-boyfriend and holding 2 slices that were incompatible. But Vickie is compatible with ROBIN. It doesn't matter that she's also a girl, you see! Giving her the jelly and their unspoken shared look and understanding is THE moment they realize their attraction is mutual.

And they made these points about Rovickie with food. (Also see another easter egg where they used food to associate Will with Mike.)

And then Vickie's immediate next line: "I don't know what's wrong with me." She talks about her mouth moving faster than her brain, but the GAY subtext is here also. Something "wrong" about her = being gay = feeling "like a mistake." This is Vickie telling Robin "I'm kind of odd / gay, you know..."

The Stranger Things writers KNOW about gay subtext. So when Mike calls FRUIT (a derogatory term for gay men) on pizza "blasphemous" and comically is made to eat it, AND he says afterward "No, you're right. It's good"? ...

... we're just supposed to IGNORE that????? Just accept it? And if it's not that, then what was the point of the scene?

It is frankly, a pretty BLATANT hint that Mike is QUEER.

And he loves Will. This isn't some unrequited love story -- the writers know the proper way to handle that which is to resolve it quickly... they did that with Dustin's hopes for Max being introduced AND resolved within the space of a season. (Same with Steve liking Robin.) Meanwhile, Will's love for Mike has been built over FOUR seasons, and everything remains unresolved between them, the Painting Lie being one of the most important things. (Will coming out to Mike being the other.)

-teambyler

[ki-flor]

Yeah them:

[gayofthefae]

I think about the delivery of "I mean it how you mean it. However that was"

I think about this everyday btw.

[apocalyptic-byler]

and if i said byler’s first kiss deserves as much passion as jancy’s first kiss then what

[kidovna]

OH MY GOD SHAWN AND MICHAEL ABSOLUTE PERFECTION

you get itttttt

[conanssummerchild]

turns out that all a tv show needs to interest me is an autistic character with gay subtext that i can relate to

[gayofthefae]

"He would have never loved me"

"I'll never know if he would have loved me"

[michaelinprogress]

hey guys im back to talk about mike wheeler again

I feel like people talk about will and his loss of childhood a lot, which is so devastating ofc, and it's definitely a huge theme in the show (god praise the duffers), but when are we going to talk about Mike and his loss of a childhood?

Will is the more obvious one for this trope, as we still see him wanting to play D&D in season three, but what about Mike?

Mike, who argues with his mom about starting to get rid of his toys and action figures

Mike, who still has all of Will's drawings from when they were kids hung up on his walls

Mike, who still spends most of his time in the basement instead of his bedroom because his happiest childhood memories are there

Mike, who stayed in the same style of clothing he wore when he was younger and didn't begin to develop his own sense of style until Eddie made fun of him, saying his mother dresses him

I feel like a big part of why Mike got so angry at Will for being "childish" is because his family and the world around him makes him feel more ashamed for still feeling young and not wanting to move on yet. He associates his inner child with Will, and he can't love Will like he does, so he forces himself to "grow up," mainly in the way of dating El. Will's refusal to leave his childhood is more understandable, and I know Joyce is a gentle and good mother and would never make him feel ashamed for feeling how he does.

But when Mike makes him feel ashamed? He leaves it all behind, he makes himself abandon his childhood, accepting that he needs to grow up and destroying castle byers. When he's faced with his childhood ending, he takes it and destroys it himself, in a way. But Mike? Mike can only suppress as far inwards as he can, still behind Will in leaving childhood, even though he can't admit it.

They both lost things, and they both have very different trauma, and I think it's time we start exploring Mike's a little more!!!!!!!

[wheelercurse]

Do you think about how these two scenes are in the same episode?

[gayofthefae]

Ooooooooooh

I love parallels where they are the subtext of each other, just like the s2 Lumax and S4 Byler apology scenes matching in both music and lines.

Maybe you should find something you actually care about, Mike. Maybe you should remember. What about what you care about?

"Maybe you should find something you care about, too."

"What the hell is that supposed to mean?"

4x01

"What about us?"

"What?"

4x02

[chirpsythismorning]

Some of the evidence supporting Mike not being in love with El is brutal. No, but seriously.

In s3, when El's leg is injured, instead of Mike putting his arm around her waist, allowing him to take some of the weight off her injured leg, he puts his arm around her shoulder, basically having the exact opposite affect of taking the weight off of her, instead just adding more weight for her to have to carry.

Now, I’m not coming at Mike here, I’m actually coming at the writers, because this choice here has everything to do with them using this gesture to signal Mike’s lack of feelings for El, even at the expense of realism.

I say this bc any person with common sense, including Finn and everyone around him and Millie filming these shots, would've known it looked unnatural for Mike to be adding more weight onto El as opposed to taking some off of her.

This means that what Mike did here, Finn was directed to do, and therefore it was for a specific reason.

And we know they could have easily made the opposite choice, because they show us Max AND Lucas doing it.

See how putting an arm around El's waist looks so much more natural? Because homegirl is injured and clearly needs help taking weight off her leg to qualm some of the pain she's experiencing there, which is why Max and Lucas are shown here doing it the correct way.

And so, why can't Mike do the same? Why are the writers making a point to show Mike being incapable of simply taking some weight off of El, instead doing the exact opposite?

I don't think it's as deep as Mike not being able to do something intimate, and that's bc, again we see Max and Lucas doing it.

I honestly think what they're trying to convey with this choice here, is that Mike thinks he's helping El, when he is in fact doing the opposite despite his best efforts. The implications of that and how that sort of aligns with their romantic relationship and what it leads to at the end of s3, going into s4, is pretty spot on.

I do think Mike thinks he's doing the right thing by being with El instead of voicing any doubts at the end of s3, because he is under the assumption that she is in love with him. I do think he believes he is indebted to her and that this is the least he can do after everything they've been through together, which has mostly been riddled with romantic pressures and so continuing that instead of disputing it seems like the only option anyways. Not to mention, he does care for her deeply, so it's not hard to imagine that he's a teenage boy confusing deep care for love (he literally tells us this is his problem when he can only say care and not love to El's face... but that's a whole other conversation).

Still, when it's all said and done, Mike's not actually doing El any favors by being with her romantically, if that is not what he truly wants.

Because that's the sad truth about all of this, which is that you would never want someone to be with you just because you want them. If you knew that they truly couldn't have those feelings for you, you'd want to know, right? You don't deserve someone just because you have deep feelings for them. And I think there's so many layers to this idea, bc many people are capable of not giving Byler a chance bc they truly believe Mike could never return Will's feelings. Will also feels this way atp, so though it hurts, he rips the band aid off, because he would never want Mike to be with him just out of pity or something. No one would want that. And so it all really comes down to who Mike truly loves romantically and wants to be with. And the right thing to do, even if it hurts someone, is to be honest, because being with them just bc you think that will make them happy is never going to be enough if you aren't truly feeling it, or worse, feel it for someone else.

We see how Mike's inability to be honest with El at the end of s3, leads to a season of Mike feeling deeply insecure and undeserving of the love El has to offer him, and even though he does try, he always comes up short. Despite Mike putting up this front that they are the perfect couple, the details are telling us something is off. And it gives him away.

Another example that I think is very similar to this loaded gesture from Mike to El in s3, is the scene in s4 when they hug in the airport.

Common sense ppl, picture this: You're reuniting with your long distance girlfriend. Then suddenly, she runs up to you, with her arms wide open, and instead of opening your arms wide to embrace her properly, you take the bouquet of flowers you brought her as a gift, and shove them against your chest just as she approaches to hug you, effectively squishing the present you got for her (a pretty delicate present at that) for no reason other than to... what exactly?

Like?? El isn't even squishing the present Mike, she's trying to hug you, dude! Your gf is trying to hug you properly and you threw the gift you got for her in between you so you could throw in a careful! x3??

Again, this has less to do with Mike's thoughts and reasoning behind this gesture in a literal sense, and more to do with the simple fact that this is a narrative choice! Mike is not a real person! There are real people sitting down and writing this and actors are having to do multiple takes to act it out. What feels natural for a situation is going to be what is often chosen 9 times out of 10, because of realism and wanting the audience to see stuff happening that is believable. That 1 time though, when it's not being done the way it would usually be, is usually because there's a specific reason for it.!

So the question really is, not why is Mike doing this, but why are the writers having Mike do this, and what message are they trying to convey about Mike's feelings based on his behavior, in these moments where he's just not capable of committing to El genuinely, one way or another?

[sade-alicious]

oh i soo need a scene like this for byler in season 5

(also i couldnt find the full scene but at the end steve knocks and interrupts them)