#jonathan byers analysis

[nqstar]

I’m so fucking ready to see this squad in action man.

[gayofthefae]

The contrast between siblings like Jonathan and Will vs Nancy and Mike, Lucas and Erica is LOUD.

Nancy and Mike, Lucas and Erica love each other very much but they also tease each other and they bicker but they secretly think the other is cool but they would openly die for them. They go through phases of closeness and distance as they age, sometimes hardly talking, sometimes spending lots of time together.

Jonathan and Will aren't like that because Jonathan really isn't his brother, he's his father. I was rewatching some Jonathan and Will scenes the other night and you can really feel it in both the writing and performance. I recently saw someone say that there's an energy actors have who are parents in real life that actors who aren't parents just can't fully convince you onscreen that they are the same, and I've said before that Charlie Heaton being a father since before the show is really felt in his performance since season 1 and assists in that history of the relationship. There's a way parents interact with kids that isn't how the average 20 year old does who would be auditioning for the role.

You can feel it in both writing and performance. Every conversation of their is based in giving Will words of wisdom and advice. He never tells Will anything that he's going through in the same way a parent avoids putting their problems on their children. Unlike the typical siblings contrasting them, they don't go through any phases of anything (I am about to make a post about season 4 and how even that is unique to them). He is just always there and they are always like that. And in performance, you can watch Jonathan and see him constantly seeking and valuing Will's opinion on the things he's saying. Every scene, his priority is how Will takes it. From "you shouldn't like things just 'cause you're supposed to" to "have fun, okay?" And there is something I can't quite place about that "have fun, okay?" That is so parental too.

But overall, that energy in every scene lends itself to something parents do that siblings don't and are shown not to in this show. He prioritized Will's happiness from big to small instances at every moment. Other siblings can nag and upset each other but would be a shoulder try cry on. He wouldn't even do that. The dynamic is much more parental even when Will does that somewhat. The difference between

"friends? What friends?" "you go to parties here?" "Will does not"

and

"Is that why you don't have any friends?" "It's because you're my best friend and I like hanging out with you"

That is a parental response. Eleven is his more tradition sibling and in response to the same line slapped him in the chest with a bouquet, but that isn't Jonathan's role in his life.

It's even down in whose speech his season 4 one parallels: Karen's in season 1 to Mike. A parent's to her son.

And it goes to show that a lot of that speech boils down to "I'm sorry I acted like your brother and slacked off as a parent". The things he did in season 4 have been in some way or another done by all other siblings on the show. But not him, he can't. Because he isn't just a big brother. That's his baby.

[gayofthefae]

Lonnie pushes him up against a wall as soon as he shows up. It's the first thing Lonnie Byers does on our screen.

I definitely believe he was physically abusive. If nothing else from the venom that lies in the words of a survivor saying "get off me".

Jonathan told his father 'don't touch me'. I agree.

the 'you've gotten stronger' line from lonnie makes me cry because it implies that lonnie was not just mentally, verbally and emotionally abusive but also physically abusive and that poor little jonathan had to defend himself against his own father

and jonathan checking the trunk of lonnies car is even sadder cus it further proves that he was physically abusive to jonathan

its because of lonnie that jonathans afraid to lose nancy and feels that he's not worth enough to her

its because of lonnie that jonathan had to be an adult as a child

its because of lonnie that jonathan isn't good at talking to people and puts everyone before himself

its because of lonnie that jonathan feels undeserving of being loved

its because of lonnie that made jonathan who he is and afraid to be like his father even though he is nothing like lonnie

lonnie byers is the worst father ever yet jonathan has a heart of gold and would do anything for the ones he loves and cares about

lonnie byers hurt this sweet boy who grew up too fast

jonathan cares and loves so hard yet because of his father, he still feels like he'll be like him

[zom61eboy]

Stancy & Byler in s4

i gotta say i dont understand how some people say stancy will be endgame because it was treated the same way as byler in s4. i dont see how those two ships were similar AT ALL. in fact, they were OPPOSITES.

ok so we have both stancy and byler teaming up while jonathan/el isnt there. steve expresses his love for nancy and will expresses his love for mike. pretty similar, right? NO.

steve focuses on what HE wants out of a relationship with nancy, ignoring nancy’s own desires (and confessing to her while nancy is literally in a relationship). do you seriously think nancy who is so focused on her career, would want to have SIX children and be a regular housewife? no.

now on the other hand we have will. he focuses on what he thinks mike needs. he hides his own feelings, disguising them as el’s because he thinks hes helping and making mike happy. and mike was happy, but not because of el. because will’s feelings for him was EXACTLY how mike wanted to be loved.

and now, the conclusion of s4. we see jancy reuniting and steve looking disappointed and robin consoling him. while with byler? their last scenes are with each other.

one is a one sided love while the other one isnt.

and yes jancy do have their problems that they will need to work on in s5. but do you really think a stupid lie about a college application is enough to break them apart? i dont think so. and also i do think nancy was a bit attracted to steve in s4 but it was just that. attraction. not love. she was feeling insecure about her relationship and people kept trying to push them together (and i think thats also a bit similar to how will was pushing mileven together) but ultimately steve isnt what nancy needs.

[eeriesilkworm]

Why I think the flashback scene in ST5 is about Lonnie (and Mike and Jonathan's complicated relationship...)

CW: This post discusses potential spoilers and mentions implied abuse (It's about Lonnie, after all...) proceed with caution!

So, we already know about the casting call for a scene featuring 8-year-old Mike and Will, and 13-year-old Jonathan.

I've had multiple thoughts about what this scene could be (so many possibilities!) but after reading a leak regarding this scene, I've finally settled on (an admittedly speculative) theory.

(Of course, not all leaks are accurate, so take this with a grain of salt. And if you’re avoiding spoilers, consider this your cue to stop reading!)

Based on the leak, here’s what we know about the scene so far:

It is not a supernatural or horror-based memory (unlike Will’s 1983 flashbacks of the Upside Down).

It takes place on a school set (likely Hawkins Elementary, which makes sense if they’re reusing sets e.g. Holly Wheeler’s school).

The scene includes multiple parallels to Season 2.

This made me wonder: what Season 2 themes involving Mike, Will, and Jonathan could be echoed here—without needing the supernatural?

It’s difficult to answer because Will’s entire plot in Season 2 revolves around the supernatural. Namely, his possession by the Mind Flayer. But if this flashback isn’t supernatural, maybe the show is drawing on what the Mind Flayer represents: trauma, fear, and abuse.

The Mind Flayer as an allegory for trauma and PTSD

I don’t need to make this section long—most fans are acutely aware that the Mind Flayer is associated with trauma and PTSD. This is supported by the fact that these hauntings begin when the anniversary of Will’s abduction approaches, and that Will is diagnosed with PTSD by Dr Owens. The only thing that people may need convincing of, is that the Mind Flayer (and Upside Down) serve as allegory not just for trauma, but for Will’s specific trauma concerning his father. @greenfiend has an excellent series which delves into this theory.

Will is good at hiding

Season 2 also clearly shows us what Will's primary trauma response is: He initially freezes, be he also runs and hides. The way Will ran and hid behind the stairs on Halloween seemed practiced to me. Like he had done this before. He doesn't panic, and he doesn't keep running. He chooses to close his eyes and hide in a self-soothing position.

In fact, Jonathan himself has said that Will is good at hiding:

He wouldn't know this if he hadn't witnessed Will hiding before. In fact, Will being good at hiding implies he is also difficult to find.

It would make sense for us to see this play out: Will hiding, and Jonathan attempting to find him. And if Mike is also there, and we're paralleling Season 2, then that means...

Mike is good at finding

Despite Will being good at hiding, Season 2 also showed us that Mike is good at finding him. There are three Mind Flayer associated scenes in which Mike is the one to find Will, and in two of them, he's also the one who breaks him out of the visions.

He spots him outside the arcade:

He's the first to find him at Halloween: "I couldn't find you!"

And he's the first to find Will outside Hawkins Middle on the field: "I just found him like this!"

The 1979 Theory

If we're able to acknowledge that the Mind Flayer serves as an allegory for trauma and PTSD, then the gates which allowed the Mind Flayer to penetrate Hawkins (and Will by extension) are also relevent.

Interestingly, the first gate was opened by El in 1979. In this flashback—if Mike and Will are aged 8 years old—that means it also takes place in 1979.

I've made a fairly visual (rather than analytical) post about what I think may have happened to Will in 1979 and how it parallels the Hawkins Lab Massacre.

(Content warning: while nothing is explicit, the subject matter involves implied child abuse).

TL;DR: I believe Lonnie’s abuse escalated in 1979, and it marked a significant trauma for Will—one that he likely repressed or fragmented, much like El did with her memories of the massacre. That would make 1979 a foundational year for both of them: the year their “gates” were opened.

Jonathan’s guilt (the Mike vs Jonathan argument leak)

Additonally, there is a leak which claims Mike and Jonathan will get into an argument about Will's safety this season.

If this ends up being true, I think it will feed into this flashback scene as well. Specifically, Jonathan's guilt and possible quiet resentment of Mike.

I say resentment because Jonathan has made it clear that he views Will as his best friend. He also took on a somewhat parental role helping to raise Will, despite only being 4 years older. He likely feels that Will’s safety and wellbeing is his responsibility.

However, the show has also told us that children aren’t always honest with their parents/ family, but they usually tell their friends everything:

Once again, I’ll point to my previous post about 1979, and the fact that I believe there is something concerning Lonnie’s abuse that Mike is somewhat privy to, that Joyce and Jonathan are not. Because Will told Mike things he didn't tell anyone else.

Jonathan on the other hand, is concerned and insecure that Will no longer comes to him when he needs help or advice.

He said so himself in Season 4:

Jonathan also has a track record of not being around when bad things happen to Will—or not being the one to "rescue" him—but Mike usually is:

Will was at Mike's house before he went missing, and Jonathan was supposed to be waiting at home for him. While Jonathan was focused on capturing the Demogorgon, Mike was focused on finding Will.

Will was trick-or-treating with Mike when he was chased by the Mind Flayer, and Jonathan was at a party when he was supposed to be supervising Will. While Jonathan was partying, Mike brought Will home to his place.

When Will was possessed by the Mind Flayer, Mike stayed by his side the entire time, while Jonathan met with Murray to expose the Hawkins Lab scandal.

It was Mike's memory of meeting Will for the first time that allowed Will to (partially) break out of his possession and use morse code.

None of these are Jonathan's fault, but he has clearly expressed guilt:

If an argument does break out between Mike and Jonathan this season, I think it will be fuelled by exactly that: Jonathan’s quiet resentment and frustration that Mike keeps “butting in,” keeps (trying) to protect Will in ways that Jonathan believes should be his responsibility.

And if emotions run high, I wouldn’t be surprised if Mike snaps back with something like, “Well, I’ve actually been there when Will needed someone. Can you say the same?”

Likewise—Jonathan, who is aware of Will's romantic feelings for Mike—would find that quite rich coming from him, as he's witnessed his brother's heart break.

So for Mike to throw Will’s emotional well-being back in Jonathan’s face? That would cut deep. It would feel hypocritical. And that’s what would make the fight so compelling—two people who love Will deeply, clashing over how to protect him, while unknowingly tearing open wounds they both helped shape.

In this post I point out that Mike and Jonathan's "heart-to-heart" conversations with Will in ST4 were very similar: they were both seeking reconnection with him and expressing concern that they have become distant.

This tension will culminate in Season 5.

How it culminates (my actual theory regarding the flashback)

I speculate that the flashback will show Jonathan arriving at Hawkins Elementary to pick Will up from school, only to find out that Will isn’t where he’s supposed to be. But not because he got lost—because he’s hiding.

The reason why Will is hiding may not be explicitly stated, but it's because he's scared to go home—scared to see Lonnie.

Jonathan will search for Will, but it will likely be Mike who finds him first, or Mike who is already with him (and alerts Jonathan).

Mike also might already have an inkling as to why Will doesn’t want to go home. Because friends don’t lie. Because friends tell each other things they don’t tell parents.

He might even offer to let Will come stay at his place—a callback to what he does years later in Season 2, when he says he’ll "take him home" and brings him to the Wheeler house instead.

This flashback will be seen from either Mike or Jonathan's perspective, as Will's memories of 1979 are likely spotty. It will also highlight the dynamic between the three: Jonathan and Mike are both similarly protective of Will due to their affection for him. But this also creates wounds:

Because Mike feels helpless to protect Will from harm, even if he is always there for him, and Jonathan is frustrated by Will's habit of repressing and hiding his pain.

Well, that's my theory. What do you guys think the flashback scene will be about?

[therainscene]

Gonna be a bit of a buzzkill here, but: I think what annoys me about Ted's been casually assuming that Mike was dating Will this whole time theories is that they always tend to treat it as a fun outcome.

Like, I get it: Ted's the useless one-dimensional suburban dad who makes bland observations he thinks are insightful quips, and he hasn't had much of a character arc beyond getting dragged along for the ride his more three-dimensional wife is on -- so what is there for him to do, really, other than to delight us with one final, genuinely insightful joke that subverts our expectations but makes perfect sense in hindsight?

But I feel like this would essentially make him one of those "allies" whose egos are more important to them than actually being supportive, and so they make smug jokes about how accepting they are at the expense of their kids' fear of rejection:

"I hate my gay son! Oh, not because he's gay, he's just an asshole." 🤭 "Why are you telling me you're gay? I figured that out years ago. Stop crying and go help your mother with the dishes." 🙄 etc.

It wouldn't be out of character for Ted to do this. I can totally see him doing it! But it's out of character for the show to make light of queer struggles, so I'd expect it to be critical of Ted for doing this.

Often, parents like the ones described above really do mean well, but they just don't know what they're supposed to do other than try to keep treating their kid the same as if they were straight. Lots of parents struggle with that; I'd argue even Joyce does in S3:

Will's clearly experiencing a specifically queer difficulty here -- boys like him aren't allowed to fall in love and he's upset about having to watch straight people openly enjoy things he thinks he'll never have -- and that apparently sails over Joyce's head. She just smiles at her Silly Immature Boy Who Doesn't Get The Appeal Of Sex Yet and drops the topic.

[Edit: To be clear, Joyce knows he's gay and is explicitly showing support for gay love here. She just has a blind spot when it comes to the gay teen experience.]

It's a disappointing change in her approach from the first two seasons, in which she fought her ass off to understand and advocate for his needs, even when communication seemed nigh impossible.

But then, maybe S3 is about granting Will his S2 wish to not be coddled by his mom anymore.

The Jonwill heart-to-heart at the end of S4 is my favourite scene in the whole show, because it's a pitch-perfect demonstration of how to balance closeted queer kids' need for support against their need to handle things on their own terms, all without embarrassing them by showing your hand of Already Knowing.

Maybe you're thinking: didn't Karen do exactly this with Mike all the way back in S1?

[Literally hiding his future beard in his closet during this convo lol 10/10 queer-coding]

Well, no. The point I made in my previous Wheeler analysis still applies: Karen, as of S1, is too prone to trusting dangerous authorities over her own kids -- and so her words ring hollow. She means well, but deep down she's prioritizing her need to feel like a good mother over putting any real effort into figuring out what Mike needs: reassurance that he and his flock of outcast friends will be safe if he's open with her.

The key thing Jonathan gets right is to understand his brother well enough to directly address the underlying fear that's been preventing Will from opening up:

So if Ted's sole contribution to Mike's queer arc ends up being a reveal that he's always known and been too cool to blab to anyone, but also that he did nothing about it other than to smugly wait for Mike to come out...?

...I just think that would feel more tragic than funny.

[sambyers-wheeler]

Byler analysis

Ok so I was rewatching 4x09 and the one scene with the endgame couples came up and I noticed something.

Ok so if you look at each couple, they are very clearly divided despite the expected blocking of a scene with this gravity. I’ll break down the divided sections below. ⬇️

Section one: Jopper

So the section where they are is what I would call the clearest. The air and horizon look the least contaminated and the ground in front of them only has smaller cracks. So if you look in the background of the section you can barely make out a tower that resembles a radio tower, I’ll explain the significance of this in a bit. So I would venture to say their relationship is already established, has few problems, and is not heavily involved with the supernatural plot (similar to season one). Section two: Byler

Their section is sitting directly in the middle of the shot and the largest rift, has a red looking horizon, has a heart with lightning on top of them (as does Jopper and I will explain this later as well), the ground in front of them seems very affected by the rifts. Despite them being in the middle of the biggest rift it barely divides them. They also have a radio tower in the distance, very clearly in the middle of them (probably the clearest one in the shot). Overall they are very close and have the least interference in the shot. This signifies to me that they are very crucial to the story, are involved in the supernatural plot quite a bit, their arc focuses around their relationship, and figuring out where they belong.

Section three: El

So her section is directly in the middle of the biggest plume of smoke and there is no clear horizon in her shot at all. The largest rift is directly in front of her, no radio tower in sight. Instead on her horizon is a gap in the smoke surrounded by and emitting red light. She is very clearly alone except that mike is barely in her section and very far away and Johnathan and Nancy are further into the section and closer by a little. To me this means that in season five she is going to be the main character in the supernatural plot, she is going to be dating Mike but very briefly before they both end it, and then she is going to rely heavily on platonic relationships this season.

Section four: Jancy

Theirs is interesting, in the section with their heads (that’s what I’m counting as their section) there are multiple rifts and smoke plumes, the destruction looks bad, there is a helicopter in the sky, and there is a radio tower in the distance. They are close to El so I don’t think they will be off in their own story line like season one but they will have a slightly separated storyline. The helicopter is right in front of the radio tower symbolizing an obstacle or something in their way. Steve, the helicopter represents Steve. The helicopter played a big part in helping me understand the symbolism in this shot. So I would say that they are very crucial to El and the others and they are struggling with their relationship.

Ok onto the other things.

Heart clouds:

The heart clouds represent 2 things. One is a change in the relationship, this means for Jopper and Byler their relationships will change. Why these two and not Jancy? Well let’s start with Jopper. Jopper is an established relationship and they are adults and we are going to have a time skip so it is logical to assume there will be a wedding. Also maybe a more mature change in their relationship. For Byler they have been friends the entire show, and logically ( if you are able to see very obvious subtext) they will end up dating by the end of the show. The heart represents this change in relationship from friends to dating. Jancy might breakup and their relationship might be bumpy and need repairs but overall their relationship will not change. I at least think that they will end the series by them going off to some college together and very happy. They have not had a significant chance in relationship. That is why only Jopper and Byler have the hearts. Two is the hearts also represent charged scenes between the characters since they both have lightning coming out but that’s not as important as the change in relationship.

Radio towers:

The radio towers, these really tipped me off and made me want to do this analysis. Ok so the radio towers represent a future or destination of some sort. (If you all have any better ideas of what they represent feel free to share!) they are clearly placed in front of Jopper, Byler, and Jancy. Though Jancy has the helicopter in front. These represent happy endings for the characters since they are an end point on the horizon. Now El doesn’t have one and here’s what I think that means.

El’s lack of a radio tower and what I think that means:

So, El is very obviously positioned in the biggest smoke column, which is where the upside down is bleeding into Hawkins. She doesn’t have a radio tower or even a clear horizon. This to me means that, sadly, she is foreshadowed to either not survive or be stuck in the upside down somehow. Since the radio towers represent a future/ destination and she only has something from the upside down in her section, that’s why this foreshadows that. And also what Mille said about see El’s ending.

That’s it!! Wow that was a lot of typing. Let me know if anything is off or if I should change anything. If I get a little repetitive, sorry!! I have a problem with that. If I need to elaborate on anything I totally will js ask!!!

[love-byers]

the first time i saw this, when i was NOT a byler shipper, i thought el was running TO mike. i thought we were getting a sweet moment where el runs to mike and he puts an arm around her or hugs her.

then i realized she was running away from him. 

and i was like, why?? they're supposed to be the couple why does she not want his comfort??

and even after will calls her out on doing mike wrong by lying to him, even after she sees that mike is attempting to talk to her and comfort her, that he's not angry at her, she still tells angela to lie to mike. more lies. that's how much she cares about keeping up the persona. had angela lied to mike, el would've continued lying to him the entire week. something she knows in her heart is wrong and not fair to mike.

this is a theme in s4. putting who you want to be seen as before being honest with your bf/gf. going above and beyond to preserve your lie, to be seen as who you want to be.

chrissy does that with jason. who she portrays herself as is completely different than who she really is and what she's really going through. jason has absolutely no idea chrissy is struggling and refused to believe chrissy would buy drugs, because chrissy didn't want to tell him. who knows how jason would've reacted if chrissy was honest, we don't know because chrissy didn't trust him enough to tell him. that's not love at all, that's sad.

this is a point in s2 as well. murray calls nancy out for being afraid to be her true self, and she stays with steve because she doesn't have to be her true self around him. she is her true self when she's with jonathan, and that's why they worked together. that's love.

the exact same thing happens with chrissy. the first time we see her genuinely smile is when she's with eddie. she's sweet and charismatic, and had she lived she totally would've gone to eddie's show, something you never would've expected from her, something her boyfriend, the person she pretends to love, would NEVER do.

robin and steve reinforce this too

you fall in love with the person who makes you feel accepted, the person who makes you feel like you can be who you are. the person you trust with your true self.

mike and el don't trust each other enough, they don't understand each other well enough.

they would have to change their behavior towards each other by leaps and bounds, and we're already at the last season. there is no time for that. stranger things isn't a multi season show about the complexity of romantic relationships and the healthy way to resolve problems. there is no time for that in just about any movie or show, especially a sci-fi show. you know what's way easier and way more likable? pairing your character with someone they naturally click with, who bring out the best in each other and for some reason can't help but be their authentic selves when they're with each other.

did it with jancy, like i said earlier

did it with lumax. when lucas and max talked on the bus max found herself spewing about things she'd never even said out loud before, and she had to stop herself. something about lucas just made her feel comfortable, like she could be herself and tell the truth. she trusted him.

"You're nothing like your brother, okay? You're cool and different, you're super smart, and you're like, totally tubular."

jopper too! joyce constantly had to hide things from bob, she was insecure about their family not being normal.

"This is not a normal family."

"It could be."

though bob had good intentions, the message of the show is not trying to be normal when you aren't. whatever it is about you that makes you weird or different, whatever you've been through that changed you, stay true to it. dont bottle it up and try to be someone else. all of vecnas victims in s4 were doing this, and it didn't end well for them.

they even did it with dustin and suzie. dustin constantly tries to impress max with his teeth, then in season 3 he says suzie thinks kissing is better without teeth. he doesn't have to be insecure about that or try to impress her. she likes him for him.

mike isn't comfortable being his true self around el either. he's insecure about his interests, he feels like he has to act older and cooler to impress her.

you shouldn't be with the person you feel you have to impress. you should be with the person who relieves that pressure, who makes you feel like being the authentic you is enough.

jonathan and nancy, lucas and max, joyce and hopper, dustin and suzie,

cough WILL AND MIKE cough...

[sapphicslut777]

this scene in st1 when karen is saying to mike “i want you to feel like you can talk to me, you don’t have to hide anything from me” she had no idea about the el plot line at this point… she was letting him know it’s safe to talk to her

suspiciously like this scene from st4 when jonathan is hinting to will that he knows he’s gay and is comforting him and telling him he loves him no matter what and he’s “here to talk, now more than ever” ❤️❤️❤️

[henry-fox-biggest-stan]

Making a post about the s1 parallels in s4 (there’s a lot) but I just needed to post this rn. God, they’re insane.

Also if I might add: “I always took you for a queer” vs “oh no, did we embarrass you in front of your boyfriend” (with mocking laugher).

[lune-moon-nuit]

Not Just El’s Boyfriend and El’s Dad: The Untold Bond Between Hopper and Mike

I saw a tweet today from a Byler fan saying she was starting to have doubts about Byler… because of a behind-the-scenes photo from Season 5 showing Hopper talking to Mike. And I just—why?

Why such doubt just because these two are interacting?

Even before Hopper became El’s adoptive father, Mike knew him. He wasn’t some stranger parachuted into the story. He was the sheriff of Hawkins—a small town where everyone knows everyone. Mike grew up hearing his name. Hopper is also a childhood friend of Joyce… Joyce, who happens to be the mother of Mike’s best friend, Will. And honestly? It’s not far-fetched to assume that either Karen or Ted probably knew Hopper, or at least someone in that circle, from high school.

Their dynamic didn’t start with El. It started in Season 1, before Mike even met her.

When Will disappeared, Hopper was the one leading the search. He showed up, talked to the kids, went to the school. From Mike’s perspective, Hopper was someone who gave a damn. A man who was actively trying to bring his best friend home. That matters. That sticks.

Let’s not forget that it was Hopper who revived Will in the Upside Down—giving him CPR. He literally brought Will back from the dead. That’s Mike’s best friend. That’s a moment Mike never saw, but that shaped everything.

Later, between season 1 and season 2, Hopper regularly took Will to Hawkins Lab for his check-ups with Joyce. It wasn’t a one-time thing. Will greets him casually in the parking lot like it’s completely normal. Like it’s routine. There’s clearly an established connection.

And then… Season 2 happened.

The massacre at the lab. Hopper and Mike were both there—start to finish. They saw people die. They were chased. They witnessed the same horrors, narrowly escaped death themselves, and were both powerless in the face of Bob’s death—forced to watch as Joyce broke down while Will, completely possessed, had to be sedated against his will. They were together in the cabin during the recalling memories speeches-like scene, trying to bring Will back. Hopper was literally present—along with Joyce and Jonathan—when Mike delivered that emotional monologue to Will, during one of the most raw and vulnerable moments we’ve ever seen from him. We tend to forget that because the scene is shot to highlight the intimacy between Mike and Will—it’s framed like a one-on-one, emphasizing their unique emotional bond—but Joyce, Jonathan, and Hopper are very much there.

He was standing right there when Mike delivered one of the most raw, gut-wrenching speeches in the series—begging Will to come back to him.

Yes, the scene is framed to highlight Mike and Will’s emotional intimacy—but Hopper? Hopper heard that speech. He witnessed it. He saw this kid be the emotional anchor for his best friend. Hopper knows Mike’s heart.

And that makes what happens next hit even harder.

Because when El returns, and Mike snaps—screaming, hitting, sobbing into Hopper’s chest—it’s not just about El.

Yes, Mike was angry upon learning that Hopper knew El was alive and had hidden her all this time—he clearly felt betrayed. But when Mike starts punching Hopper in the chest and stomach like a worn-out 13-year-old kid using a punching bag, it’s the culmination of everything he’s endured.

When Mike’s voice cracks and he yells, “I BLAME YOU, YOU LIAR PIECE OF SHIT,” and when he hits Hopper like a worn-out kid who doesn’t know where else to put the pain—that’s not just teenage angst. That’s trauma. That’s a breaking point.

Yes, part of his anger is directed at Hopper.

But part of it is directed inward. Part of it is the world. Part of it is grief.

And especially part of it is GUILT (I really suggest you all to read this analysis divided in 2 part : here and here to get all the level of the meaning of this scene cause this is more deep than I could ever explain with the whole context).

Because Mike :

had just witnessed Will screaming in agony, burning from the inside out; he watched his best friend possessed, triggering a massacre in the lab that got Bob killed—putting Mike, Joyce, and Hopper’s lives in danger. Then came the desperate monologue to Will, with no guarantee they’d succeed in saving him. And right after that, El—who Mike thought was dead because of him—suddenly appears in front of him, alive. All of that, in less than 24 hours.

it’s not just about El. It never was just about El.

Hopper lets Mike hit him. He just stands there and takes it. Doesn’t flinch, doesn’t raise his voice, doesn’t defend himself. Just keeps repeating, “It’s okay, kid, it’s okay,” until Mike physically collapses into him. And that—god—that moment says everything. Because this isn’t just a kid lashing out at the man who lied about El. It’s a boy who’s been through hell for a year straight, and finally has someone steady enough to catch him when he falls apart.

Part of that moment is about having hidden El from him, sure, but another part of it is about a father figure catching a 13-year-old boy who has been a powerless witness to trauma, loss, and grief over and over again for an entire year—especially when it comes to the people he’s most deeply attached to. Not to mention the survivor’s guilt he’s been carrying (needlessly, in the end, since El was alive and not even that far from him) since her “fake” death at the end of season 1. And in the end, he breaks down.

Mike isn’t just angry. He’s grieving. He’s traumatized. He’s full of guilt and helplessness and fear. And Hopper, in that moment, sees all of it. He becomes more than the guy who hid El—he becomes the only adult who actually shows up emotionally for Mike. Because let’s be honest: Karen and Ted? Completely absent. It literally takes government agents storming their house for them to realize something is going on with their son. Meanwhile, Mike is sneaking out, harboring a traumatized girl with powers in their basement, nearly dying—and his parents are... what? Clueless. Dismissing him. Throwing away his DnD toys like it’ll cure his PTSD?

You know what gets completely overlooked when people talk about Mike Wheeler? The way his emotional insecurity isn’t just about El, or Will, or being a teenage boy in the middle of supernatural chaos—it’s about home. It’s about growing up in a house that looks stable on the outside but is emotionally hollow on the inside.

Despite the evident affection and surface-level stability that Karen and Ted Wheeler provide for their children, their parenting is marked by an emotional detachment that borders on benign neglect.

Karen and Ted Wheeler do love their kids. That’s not the issue. But their parenting—especially toward Mike—is so passive, so emotionally disconnected, that it borders on neglect. Not abuse. Not cruelty. Just... this quiet, dangerous absence.

Their love is not in question, nor is their fundamental decency; however, their consistent failure to emotionally attune to their son’s psychological needs results in a subtle but deeply rooted emotional insecurity within him. Mike, a child marked by repeated exposure to trauma, loss, and existential danger, is left largely to his own devices in processing these events. His parents’ passivity—especially Ted’s emotional absence and Karen’s well-meaning but ultimately insufficient interventions—creates a vacuum where containment, validation, and guidance should exist. The absence of firm emotional scaffolding leaves Mike both untethered and prematurely burdened with responsibilities no child his age should bear alone.

Mike is not okay. He’s lived through trauma after trauma—losing Will, almost losing El, watching people die, constantly bracing for the next crisis—and his parents’ response? “We’re grounding you. And also, we’re throwing away your DnD figures because you're acting out.” Like. What??

The only time we see them try to “discipline” Mike is by throwing away his emotionally meaningful toys as punishment in season 2 because he’s acting out due to post-traumatic depression from season 1. Instead of recognizing that their son is clearly not doing well and that the events during the week of Will’s disappearance have affected him more deeply than they realize—and maybe thinking, “We should talk to him or consider getting professional help”—their reaction is, “We’re tired of your bratty behavior. We know you’ve had a rough year, but our patience has limits, so guess what? Say goodbye to your toys. Maybe that’ll force you to grow up.”

Karen tries. She really does. But it’s all surface-level. And Ted? He’s just there. Like furniture. There’s no containment. No emotional guidance. No adult who sits down and says, “I see you're not okay. Let’s talk.” So Mike is left alone. Emotionally untethered. Forced to grow up too fast. Carrying the weight of other people’s safety on his back at age 13. That kind of internal loneliness leaves scars.

And this is where Hopper becomes so important.

Not because he replaces Mike’s parents. But because he offers—intentionally or not—a counterbalance. Hopper is messy. He oversteps. He lashes out when he’s scared. But at least he shows up. He reacts. He cares. His boundary-setting may be rough around the edges (season 3 definitely fumbled this by leaning too hard into the angry-dad trope), but for a kid like Mike? Even those flawed boundaries can feel like emotional safety.

Hopper, though far from a perfect guardian, instinctively offers Mike what his parents fail to: a consistent, if flawed, sense of containment. Through boundary-setting—sometimes executed harshly or inappropriately, as seen in season 3—Hopper imposes structure on Mike’s emotional chaos. These boundaries, while often expressed through anger or control, paradoxically become a source of safety for Mike. For a boy who has been allowed too much emotional leeway in a home where silence replaces dialogue, even Hopper’s brusque interventions can feel like acts of recognition. They affirm that someone is watching, someone is caring, someone is willing to step in—even if imperfectly.

Moreover, beneath the surface-level tension between Hopper and Mike lies a complex web of mutual respect and trust. Their arguments are not devoid of affection; rather, they are rooted in two people who care deeply, but are ill-equipped to articulate their emotional truths directly. Hopper sees Mike’s potential and his pain. Mike, in turn, gravitates toward Hopper—not just as El’s father, but as a rare adult who actively engages with his inner world, who reacts to his behavior, and who, crucially, tries to protect him (in the supernatural plot). The emotional stakes between them are not incidental—they are the product of shared trauma, mirrored protectiveness, and the unspoken recognition that, in the absence of ideal parental figures, one can become the anchor the other didn’t know they needed.

Because someone is watching. Someone notices. Someone cares enough to push back.

There’s something quietly powerful about the way Mike gravitates toward Hopper—not as El’s dad, not as a government connection, but as one of the only adults in his life who actually engages with his pain. Hopper doesn’t always get it right, but he tries. And Mike feels that. He recognizes it.

Their arguments aren’t signs of a broken relationship—they’re proof that a relationship exists at all. Because for Mike, silence is the default. Pretending he’s fine is survival.

Their bond is raw. Imperfect. Messy. But it’s real. It’s two people carrying more than they should. Two people shaped by loss. Two people trying to protect others at the cost of themselves. And in that connection, something stabilizing forms.

In this light, their bond is not defined by harmony, but by the quiet resilience of chosen family: messy, unresolved, but emotionally significant. Hopper, by offering boundaries where none existed, unknowingly gives Mike a template for emotional security—one that helps him survive, and perhaps begin to heal.

So yeah, Hopper doesn’t just become El’s dad. He becomes a kind of father to Mike, too. A reflection of what parenting should look like—not perfect, but present. And by offering Mike even the rough blueprint of emotional safety, Hopper gives him a chance to build something better inside himself.

Not harmony. Not resolution. But resilience. The quiet kind. The kind that says, “I’ll catch you, even if no one else does.” (the scene in season 2).

Mike grows up in a house where no one notices his distress until he starts yelling. He’s surrounded by adults who don’t see him. So of course he clings to the people who do. People who are in the trenches with him. People who have also suffered, who understand.

That’s why this idea that a scene between Hopper and Mike is automatically "Mileven proof" feels so… reductive. Hopper and Mike have a connection that runs way deeper than El. It’s forged in trauma, grief, survival. Hopper became a second parental figure for Mike long before Season 3 tried to turn their dynamic into a rom-com dad-vs-boyfriend cliché.

And yeah—Season 3 did a disservice to both of them. Hopper threatening Mike was messed up. The “keep the door open” speech was condescending. And even though they clearly clash, and Hopper absolutely oversteps in how he treats Mike (it’s obviously not okay to threaten a 14-year-old boy—he’s dealing with his own emotional baggage too), he’s not wrong when he says Mike and El’s relationship is unbalanced and unhealthy for both of them. Codependency isn't healthy.

But when they hug again at the end of Season 4? That moment isn’t just about making peace.

To me, it echoes the season 2 hug, where Hopper catches Mike in a moment of total collapse and provides him with physical and emotional safety—a moment of release for a 13-year-old kid who’s been holding it all in, in survival mode, doing everything he can to protect, help, and save the people he loves, people he keeps watching disappear or “die” right in front of his eyes, far too many times.

It’s Hopper being there for Mike again. Not just as “El’s dad,” but as someone who knows what this kid has survived. As someone who cares.

I’m rambling a bit, but all of this is to say: a scene between Mike and Hopper is not inherently “Mileven” proof. Yes, El is a point of connection between them—Mike is dating her (at least in seasons 3 and 4), and Hopper is her adoptive father—but Hopper is also a paternal figure for Mike in his own way.

And honestly? If anything ever happened to Ted (which… narratively, wouldn’t shock me), I fully believe Hopper would step into that father figure role for Mike without hesitation. Not just because of El. Not just because of Joyce. But because he already has. And because—if you believe in Byler—he’d be stepping in as the stepfather of the boy his daughter used to date... and the boy his stepson is in love with.

Anyway. Just... let Hopper and Mike have their own arc. Let their relationship breathe. Not everything has to circle back to Mileven. Some connections are just... deeper than that.

What’s happening between Hopper and Mike isn’t just “my daughter’s boyfriend vs. protective dad” trope. It’s the unfolding of something so much more layered: a bond between a grieving man learning how to be a father again (with El), and a traumatized boy who’s never really had an emotionally present father to begin with.

Mike doesn’t get what he needs at home. His trauma is invisible there. His emotional needs are overlooked. So when Hopper steps in—not perfectly, not gently, but consistently; not always healthy, but undeniably real— that’s not just plot filler. That’s emotional architecture. That’s a lifeline.

They fight. They clash. But their scenes (especially in season 2 and their reunion in season 4) are charged with unsaid things—grief, care, anger, protection, recognition. Because Hopper sees Mike. He pushes him. He shows up when it matters. And for a kid like Mike, that’s huge.

Their interactions are saturated with shared grief, protective instincts, and a silent understanding of loss—elements that establish a paternal dynamic rooted in survival, empathy, and mutual care.

This isn’t just about narrative function. It’s about what happens when two people who’ve both lost too much accidentally build a bridge between them.

To reduce their connection to “El’s boyfriend and her dad” is to miss the point completely. This is not about romance. It’s about what it means to be seen by an adult when you’re a hurting kid. About the way Hopper gives Mike the one thing no one else in his life does: emotional attunement. Not just authority. Not just rules. Care.

Hopper, despite his flaws and missteps, becomes the only adult male figure who consistently shows up for Mike in moments of crisis, offering not just discipline or authority, but something far more scarce in Mike’s life: emotional attunement.

Their connection is not only one of narrative convenience—it’s a poignant commentary on found family, the need for adult recognition in adolescent trauma, and the quiet, often unnoticed ways that surrogate bonds can form in the shadow of disaster.

It’s messy. It’s flawed. It’s not even fully conscious.

But it’s real.

So no… Hopper and Mike having a moment in Season 5? That doesn’t threaten Byler. It enriches the story. It grounds Mike. It reminds us that, for all his fire, Mike Wheeler is a kid who’s been looking for safety for a long time. And maybe—just maybe—he finds a bit of it in the last place he’d admit: a grumpy old sheriff who never stopped showing up.

[partypooper1324]

Jonathan clocked them so hard

[gayofthefae]

Thinking about the tragedy of parentification and how all Jonathan actually did in season 4 to apologize for was be a teenager and a brother. That's allowed. That's what he should do.

The only problem is that Will needs an adult and a father. So any attempt to be normal will hurt him and leave him hanging. Jonathan has been an adult and a father since before he was in high school. He deserves to lay it down. The most heartbreaking thing about some things is the way relaxing affects other people.

He loves that boy more than the world. That's his baby. And he will and loves being that for him and to him. But all he did in season 4 was be any older sibling from any other season, take your pick. Nancy with Mike - "drive you to school and you know I love you but we don't really hang out".

His fault in season 4 was a 17 year boy being a teenager and big brother to his younger brother...when he's supposed to be a father.

[willfreakbyers]

The way that this fandom portrays Steve sometimes pisses me off.

In season one, he was the biggest asshole ever. He was homophobic, called jonathan a queer, and said what happened to Will wasn't supposing, since he came from a family if screwups. In season one, we all agreed he was a bully, and an asshole.

But in season three, when he meets Robin, who's canonically queer, suddenly he's the biggest ally ever, at least to the fandom. Now, I'm not saying that people can't change over time, or be a better person, but it's the fact that the fandom brushes it off, meanwhile with Jonathan, he's the bad guy.

the same Jonathan who curated his own little brothers funeral, the same Jonathan who comforted his mom who was on the brink of insanity, the same Jonathan who went back to his abusive dad and literally checked the trunk of his car for Wills (maybe dead!) Body. And sure, Jonathan dod do some weird stuff in the beginning of season one, but he apologized for it. Steve never really did, at least on screen.

Both Steve and Jonathan could be towered as misunderstood and complex characters, but in my mind, Steve isn't really all that complex. I just don't understand why we as a fandom say Jonathan's the bad guy fir taking a couple of photos of Nancy in one of the first episodes of season one, but we chalk up all of Steve's mistakes since 'oh, he's such a morally good person now because he watches over the kids amd has a queer bestfriend!'

Also, side note, Steve in s4 basically cknformed that he only wanted to be with Nancy to start a family with. Not her personality, he just wanted to impregnate her 6 times. Which, that isn't very romantic sounding.

[willthewiz]

Jonathan Capturing the Right Moment

In this scene, Jonathan says he'd rather observe people than talk to them. And then says:

“People don’t really say what they're really thinking. When you capture the right moment, it says more.”

We'll get back to that later.

Here is Jonathan in season 4:

In the van scene, the camera only cuts to Jonathan when Will is telling a lie. Remember, Jonathan said people don't say what they're really thinking (the truth). But he captured the right moment, when it says more. Jonathan knows what Will is actually saying are his feelings not El's.

Will tells Mike that El told him what to draw. Then the camera cuts right to Jonathan. When he knows Will painted it and El didn't know what it was or who it was for.

Will: "I mean, without heart we'd all fall apart. Even El, especially El."

Then it cuts to Mike then Jonathan. Again, Jonathan knows this is about Will, not El. He's capturing these moments.

Will continues to lie and we once again, cut to Jonathan.

Here is more of Jonathan:

Mike: "But I am scared that one day you'll realize you don't need me anymore. And I thought that if I said how I felt it would somehow make that day hurt more."

We cut to Will and then Jonathan.

“People don’t really say what they're really thinking. When you capture the right moment, it says more.”

"But I am scared that one day you'll realize you don't need me anymore. And I thought that if I said how I felt it would somehow make that day hurt more."

Mike's fear & reason for not telling El he loves her:

What he thinks would happen:

Mike says I love you to El

One day, El realizes she doesn't need him anymore

That day hurts because she doesn't need him even though he loves her

El WANTED Mike to tell her that he loved her, but he didn't say it because he was afraid of losing her??

If Mike told El that he loved her, why would he still have doubts that she wouldn't need him??

Because Mike doesn't love her romantically and he's scared that if she knew, she wouldn't need him anymore. But that's just not true.

Jonathan is observing him in this scene. In previous scenes, Will is lying to Mike. Will isn't saying what he's really thinking (the truth to Mike). But Jonathan captures those specific moments, those lies. He sees through them and they become something more. The truth. Will is confessing his feelings for Mike through El.

In this scene, Mike is lying to El. Mike isn't saying what he's really thinking (the truth to El). But Jonathan captures this particular moment. This moment is when he sees through Mike's lies. He sees the truth. Mike is confessing his real feelings. He's saying that he isn't in love her and he's scared to lose her because of that. He's saying that the whole reason why he didn't tell her he loved her is because he's scared El wouldn't need him anymore.

Again, if Mike told El that he loved her, why would he think El wouldn't need him anymore? Why is he so scared that one day she'll come to this realization? Hm... I wonder...

Mike doesn't love El romantically, but he needs her. They will always need each other. And, I think, in season 5, Mike will realize that El will always need him and that they don't need to be in love with one another to stay with one another. Mike wouldn't lose her just because they're not together as a couple anymore.

--------------

Idk if any of this made sense or not. Not really sure about the whole Jonathan thing, but it is clear that he observes Will (and people in general) and knows he loves Mike. I just thought that what Jonathan said is interesting. Is this the shows way of saying that characters don't always mean what they say? Maybe...

I don't know anything about film, so don't take this seriously. I have no idea what I'm doing, I'm just bored and very sleep deprived.

Let me know what you think:)

[reo-bylerwagon]

something super interesting to me is how a lot of viewers still struggle seeing mike reciprocating will's feelings, when the same thing could've been said for joyce in season 3.

i'd argue she's even harder to read than mike (mainly in s4) in most moments she has with hopper in season 3.

let's start off with their first interaction in season 3! and to really get into the grime, joyce's first time seeing hopper in the season.

is she just happy she has a visitor on a super slow day at work ("you're our first customer")? could be. she did immediately drop what she was doing the moment hop walked in, though.

when she does pick up on her tasks, she does incorporate a little flirting with hop... followed by the winona doe eyes look-up

then her gaze keeps getting softer

doesn't pull her eyes away from him...

and here it is. our first ever look at joyce byers yearning. (she hasn't processed what hop is saying yet give her a break lol)

she gets lost in the moment, and actually acts on wanting to feel closer to him, and comfort him.

these lyrics from "she's got you" by patsy cline are echoing her confusion right now. the lyrics in the caption are actually wrong, it should be "i really don't know, but i know it won't let me be" (i know that bc i'm a big fan of this song but that's beside the point lol). she doesn't know what her feelings for hopper could mean, but she's starting to realize they're there, and they might even be freaking her out a bit. understandably so! she lost bob a little under 8 months ago at this point, she hasn't even had a year to process her grief and trauma that came with witnessing it all.

then, hopper makes it real and asks her out. it is all about the microexpressions. her expression might've dropped, but her eyes are still saying the same thing, they're still holding that sense of longing. but that doesn't mean she isn't afraid, and taken aback, so it makes sense why joyce retreats.

on the subject of joyce retreating, standing hopper up isn't the only example. in my opinion, this scene is a very underrated, yet summation of how joyce handles romantic confrontation.

as hopper continues to call her out, we don't see her again. because once he says this, she basically dips.

sure, hopper wasn't fully digesting the problem at hand. but, all i'm saying is, isn't it convenient for joyce to use that fact to redirect the whole "you like me, but you're scare to move on" conversation by stealing his pliers (i think?) and making this lab mission happen?

and also, something something "like mother like son".

mix that with jonathan evacuating the second steve shows up at nancy's locker

this is the part of the post where i flip the bird to anyone who says byler analysts only talk about other relationships to prove byler (which, i gotta say, is annoying in general because bro i love these characters with my whole soul, and identifying dialogue and visual parallels that I DIDN'T PUT THERE is apparently disrespectful and shallow or something? touch grass, idk what to tell you if this post is somehow offensive.) anyway! i am actually using byler to shed light on joyce's perspective on her relationship with hopper during season 3, and how similar the relationships are in stranger things collectively, so let's go!

let's rewind about 24 hours! i'm gonna lay out this interaction, because there's something familiar about it.

the second the romantic implication is said out loud, and taken as such, joyce gets deflective and uptight. this leaves hopper to emphasize their "friendship" in his defense.

this sounds a lot like mike and will's fight at rink o mania. (both in episode 2 btw)

will even clarifies that this is about friendship more than once, even if some things he said were his attempt in seeing how mike would take them. the importance of this is that joyce and mike get defensive in their own way, and it is because, regardless of how hopper/will delivered it (or intended the delivery to be), they took these conversations romantically, and reacted similarly. of course, joyce is a woman in her late 40s, and mike is a 14 year old boy, so one reaction is more extreme than the other, but that doesn't diminish the essence these reactions share. they [mike and joyce] even leave in one last stinger (again, one is more extreme than the other.)

while we're on the subject of byler and jopper uniquely paralleling each other, here's another one that spells it out better!

joyce and will feeling like they're losing their mind/going crazy because of the mindflayer vs hopper and mike feeling like they're losing their minds/going crazy because they think they're seeing things (you could go further saying its an association with el, since hop was fighting off the demodogs to keep them off of el, and mike literally thinks he's still seeing el herself).

i want to include one more scene comparison, and i've talked about it vaguely before.

the upside down couch.

before it was upside down, joyce and hop had their first moment on screen where they both openly and mutually pined for each other on this couch. and not only that, but it is all while being basked under a very similar morning sunlight.

leaving this here to prove it's the same couch just 'cause

as i said before "like mother like son"

there's another byers who carries his unconscious crush home, and tucks them into bed.

extending the web even further, in the same night, mike takes will "home" to a similar couch, where he also comforts him.

and even though we don't see it, mike (and lucas lol) also bikes with will back to the wheelers in the same rain storm joyce takes hopper home in! (and this time, it's obvious that will sleeps over.)