#the responses don't even make sense

[jewishbarbies]

if you think it's safe to live in the pnw as a poc, jew, and/or lgbt+ person because leftists in portland are loud about living there, just know that this is what the majority of people in cities/towns outside seattle and portland are like. i want out.

[canisalbus]

Hello, I'm not sure if you're aware, but tumblr is going to start helping midjourney gather data for their AI. You're one of the artists I follow here pretty actively and I wanted to warn you to maybe start nighshading your art before posting it here so it doesn't get swept up!

I've seen a couple of posts about it. Feeling disappointed but not that surprised. Also not excited about having to start nightshading/glazing my pieces but if there isn't going to be any serious regulations regarding data scraping and ai "art", there aren't a lot of choices.

Thank you for taking the time to warn me just in case, it was very thoughtful of you!

[zharizard666]

graaaaaAAAAAAAA

I miss drawing Clausten and Nesscas but idk what to even drawwww

can y'all share some ideas pls???

actually, share any ship you want me to draw

I'm having stronk artblocc :'<

[sergle]

I really truly, from the bottom of my heart, hate you bitches so much, because on the tiktok of literally COCK AND BALL jokes w brittany broski, there were a few notes/messages like this:

And I KNOW you don't think anyone's going to check. You had someone go into your askbox and say "hiii brittany broski is shitty about palestine she's really ignorant :/" and you went oh omg I didn't know!! thanks for telling me! So I checked! This is in reference to her talking in her podcast, because people were asking why she hadn't done any big press statements about Palestine, you didn't retweet this or that, you must not care, don't you care, what's your stance, etc etc please say more OKAY COOL. So what's going on there? What did Brittany say on her podcast? Is she a Bad Person? Can I have some transcript, please? ____ "Hey guys, before we get into this week's episode, I want to talk to you about the ongoing and prolonged suffering and loss of life in Gaza, in Israel, and the oppression of Palestinian people widespread. I don't ever want it to be a question that I would ever not be against the oppression of any group of people, that I would ever stand on the side of the oppressor." "There was a lot of fear of misusing my platform." ... "I will admit that I was nervous to talk about it, because I don't want to say the wrong thing. And this is too fucking serious of an issue to misspeak, or to spread misinformation, or to speak over or for someone." ... "So I want to take a moment on my biggest platform- which is this podcast, to say that I stand with the people of Palestine, I stand for the liberation of Palestinian people." ... "Every day, to log on to social media, and be just inundated with graphic, unimaginable violence, and loss, and grief, it's just--There are no words." ... "And I feel helpless. That's part of it too, when you feel helpless, the last thing you want to do is talk to people about it-- but visibility is a resource in and of itself. And I can offer that." ... "The outpouring of rage and passion online, and anger at what's happening, I would argue needs to be dedicated and focused on our elected officials. We live in a democracy- albeit an inherently flawed one- we live in a democracy where we have elected officials who were elected and put in power to represent us, and if we feel misrepresented, if we feel underrepresented in foreign affairs? These officials have public phone numbers and emails. There are scripts available online to express your disdain and your rage, and unfortunately that's one of the only ways we'll see actionable change."   "If you expected more from me, it's a terrible feeling- but I don't want to center myself, this needs to be all eyes on Palestine right now, where the real activism is happening. I would encourage you to follow journalists that are on the ground, people who are in Gaza, we need to be listening to them. I would also hope that we're at a point in this conversation where I can express my desire to stand in solidarity with the people of Palestine and that NOT meaning or suggesting or condoning anti-Semitism of any kind. There's a rise of anti-Semitism and islamophobia in the United States and it's just-- it's disgusting, and it's scary, so I want that to be said too. I just wanted to share that I am experiencing part of this collective sense of helplessness and hopelessness-- but it DOESN'T HAVE to be hopeless. I'm going to include a phone number in the description of this episode where, if you don't know the name of your senators or your Congressman, it's never too late to learn, and you can reach out to them." _______ Hm. What a bitch!! Yeah, just so ignorant and uncaring. Obviously she's not keeping up with anything. Should've retweeted more shit ig!

[vaguely-concerned]

one of the things mourn watch rook has the most comments about/seems pretty knowledgeable about when they're there is the way the necropolis will just shuffle rooms around every now and then on a whim, so I'm headcanoning that rye's previous area of expertise, outside of general watcher duties, was keeping track of and rediscovering these lost or displaced areas. that, and basically acting as a sort of tour guide when need be, such as on the day they met varric.

'have we really misplaced the ashen cathedral again? *sigh* that's the third time this year, we really must strengthen the wards. oh well. someone send for ingellvar, they'll track it down in no time I'm sure. and it might keep them out of trouble for a while'

[sanasanakun]

Jimithon Mouthwashing is such a good representation of untreated, enabled NPD like it makes me want to squeeze the life out of him. I'm endlessly fascinated when watching him interact with his crew, surroundings, and himself because he's so fucking lost in his own sauce. It's insane. If I'm being real, it makes him my favorite character in the game.

It's a little scary to say, but watching Jimmy is like seeing a mirrored version of myself two years ago before I truly committed to treatment for my NPD. He's like a shadow. The opening line "I hope this hurts," which I believe comes from Jimmy right before the crash, is such a poignant statement. It's a simple line, but I can tell you from experience that the desire to hurt others when in a narcissistic rage is overwhelming. It's such a good line to sum up Jimmy's character in that moment. Luckily, in the real world, I had my friends and family there to catch me when I hit my lowest, even though I'd hurt them so many times. Jimmy probably could've used friends to force him into therapy (cough cough Curly cough cough)

[quaranmine]

i'm not writing this and i never will so i'm setting it free into the wild but there was a period of time that i wanted desperately to write a hermitcraft psych au

[icewindandboringhorror]

I occasionally wish to reach out to old friends/acquaintances I haven't spoken to since high school/some other even earlier time in my life, but I have SOOO little social energy even for required tasks (like making dr phone calls or etc), I never have any leftover for extra ones, and it would be very odd to message someone I haven't spoken to in like 5 years out of the blue but then take 4 entire months to respond back lol.. My natural curiosity with nostalgia/collecting details of the past/etc. (literally if I were born a little earlier I would definitely do scrapbooking or something lol) is very strong, but, alas, not strong enough to beat out the Social Issues Demons apparently

[blorboazula]

Agatha in WandaVision: nosy antagonist

Agatha in AAA: PTSD incarnated hehe

[wonder-worker]

"Among their complaints [in 1460, the Yorkists] specifically blamed the earls of Wiltshire and Shrewsbury and Viscount Beaumont for ‘stirring’ the king [Henry VI] to hold a parliament at Coventry that would attaint them and for keeping them from the king’s presence and likely mercy, asserting that this was done against [the king's] will. To this they added the charge that these evil counselors were also tyrannizing other true men* without the king’s knowledge. Such claims of malfeasance obliquely raised the question of Henry’s fitness as a king, for how could he be deemed competent if such things happened without his knowledge and against his wishes? They also tied in rumors circulating somewhat earlier in the southern counties and likely to have originated in Calais that Henry was really ‘good and gracious Lord to the [Yorkists] since, it was alleged, he had not known of or assented to their attainders. On 11 June the king was compelled to issue a proclamation stating that they were indeed traitors and that assertions to the contrary were to be ignored." - Helen Maurer, "Margaret of Anjou: "Queenship and Power in Late Medieval England"

Three things that we can surmise from this:

We know where the "Henry was an innocent helpless king being controlled and manipulated by his Evil™ advisors" rhetoric came from**.

The Yorkists were deliberately trying to downplay Henry VI's actual role and involvement in politics and the Wars of the Roses. They cast him as a "statue of a king", blamed all royal policies and decisions on others*** (claiming that Henry wasn't even aware of them), and framed themselves as righteous and misunderstood counselors who remained loyal to the crown. We should keep this in mind when we look at chronicles' comments of Henry's alleged passivity and the so-called "role reversal" between him and Queen Margaret.

Henry VI's actual agency and involvement is nevertheless proven by his own actions. We know what he thought of the Yorkists, and we know he took the effort to publicly counter their claims through a proclamation of his own. That speaks louder than the politically motivated narrative of his enemies, don't you think?

*There was some truth to these criticisms. For example, Wiltshire (ie: one of the men named in the pamphlet) was reportedly involved in a horrible situation in June which included hangings and imprisonments for tax resistance in Newbury. The best propagandists always contain a degree of truth, etc. **I've seen some theories on why Margaret of Anjou wasn't mentioned in these pamphlets alongside the others even though she was clearly being vilified during that time as well, and honestly, I think those speculations are mostly unnecessary. Margaret was absent because it was regarded as very unseemly to target queens in such an officially public manner. We see a similar situation a decade later: Elizabeth Woodville was vilified and her whole family - popularly and administratively known as "the queen's kin" - was disparaged in Warwick and Clarence's pamphlets. This would have inevitably associated her with their official complaints far more than Margaret had been, but she was also not directly mentioned. It was simply not considered appropriate. ***This narrative was begun by the Duke of York & Warwick and was - demonstrably - already widespread by the end of 1460. When Edward IV came to power, there seems to have been a slight shift in how he spoke of Henry (he referred to Henry as their "great enemy and adversary"; his envoys were clearly willing to acknowledge Henry's role in Lancastrian resistance to Yorkist rule; etc), but he nevertheless continued the former narrative for the most part. I think this was because 1) it was already well-established and widespread by his father, and 2) downplaying Henry's authority would have served to emphasize Edward's own kingship, which was probably advantageous for a usurper whose deposed rival was still alive and out of reach. In some sense, the Lancastrians did the same thing with their own propaganda across the 1460s, which was clearly not as effective in terms of garnering support and is too long to get into right now, but was still very relevant when it came to emphasizing their own right to the throne while disparaging the Yorkists' claim.

[memento-morri-writes]

I've been thinking a lot about how Rook's reunion with his former mentor, Zara, is going to go, and since I can't predict what the DM is going to have her do or say, I can only dwell on what I know is going to happen. Which happens to include taking off the illusion ring that's been hiding his injuries from her. So have a snippet of the description I have planned for that moment:

tw for description of (mostly healed) injuries

He hesitates, twisting a ring on his finger. Looking at it more closely, she can tell it’s very finely crafted, and must have been very expensive. A large emerald is set into the band. Rook sighs, and pulls the ring off his finger in one quick motion.  Immediately she’s struck by the difference in his appearance as the illusion melts away. He looks awful. His warm, healthy skin fades to a dull and sickly grey. There’s huge bags under his deeply sunken eyes, and his cheeks are hollowed, as though they have been carved out by an overeager sculptor. He looks like he’s recently risen from the grave.  While he was thin before, now she can see his ribs under the skin, and his collarbones are exaggeratedly pronounce. Thin white lines left by dozens upon dozens of recently healed cuts are scattered across his body. On top of that, faded bruises cover most of his visible skin, a mottled mosaic of purple and yellow. They’re clearly days, maybe weeks old, and she can only begin to imagine what they must have looked like when fresh. Bandages are barely visible under his shirt, wrapping around his back, hinting at even more injuries.

[thefirstknife]

Apparently there was a roundtable with a senior narrative head at bungie about destiny

where he stated "don't expect to be allies with the hive. or even Savathun"

which to me seems like a weird choice to say right after deeps ending?

That's interesting. Honestly, valid comment to me. Here's the link to the article itself! The dev that made the comments is Robert Brookes. One extra quote that isn't in the tweet (goes in between the two in the tweet):

“It’s gonna be really hard to walk that back from anyone’s perspective. Even if that ever became a possibility, there’s a lot of ground to cover to make amends for that.”

We often forget about that, because obviously everyone deserves a second chance, especially in a situation where the Hive were literally manipulated into becoming what they did, but at the end of the day, their gruesome conquests that wiped out thousands of civilisations is not something that everyone can or has to forgive.

People are really eager to forgive Savathun, completely, which was always weird to me in a fandom that has gone ballistic over infinitely smaller crimes. And I get it, Savathun is an incredibly compelling character, fantastically written, absolute banger of VA work. She's such a crucial element in the whole setting of Destiny and is fascinating to read about her. 100% one of the best characters in the entire franchise, intriguing and complex beyond pretty much anyone else.

But the characters within the story itself can't view her in this way or it would be immersion breaking. To them, Savathun isn't a character that's well written, she's a monster who is responsible for some of the most horrific things across time and space. I can definitely see any alliance with her to be temporary, out of necessity and not exactly on good terms. I would love for us to eventually get together with the Hive and join forces against those that are responsible for their course in life, but I think it's definitely something that, within the universe in-character, is not something entirely realistic and would be difficult to justify.

Definitely an odd thing to say now though. Maybe it's telling us to temper our expectations next season? We need Savathun's knowledge, but I don't see us being besties with her in any capacity. I'm not sure what people expect from a season where we rez Savathun; there's probably a lot of people who expect a Caiatl situation.

Realistically, it might be an uneasy cooperation that will be very limited and possibly exploited by Savathun to get out at the end. Right now she's dead and she can't do anything and for as long as we keep her, we're safe. But now that we need her... We have no choice. We have to get her out and once she's out, she will not be bound by anything to obey us. It's a very risky move, one that we're looking at out of desperation, and the risks were nicely laid out by Saladin, Saint and Zavala in their conversation. That bit is definitely priming us to expect some heavy resistance to help from Savathun from various characters and this comment might be as well.

I can't wait for the next season's story though! Savathun talking to us again, in any capacity, is something I've been waiting for eagerly since the end of WQ. I don't doubt for a second that the conversations she'll have will be full of some heavy stuff and that she will not play nice with us and that she (and Immaru) will make most of the situation where we're desperate for her help. She will probably also genuinely want to get her revenge to the Witness, but not necessarily as our sidekick. I think that continuing with the animosity between her and us adds an extra layer of depth to the whole story with her and the Hive.

[brittlebutch]

a lot of people seem to use Entry #61 as 'proof' for the crux of the "Brian didn't care about Tim, he was Taking Advantage of Tim's conditions and Forcing him to work as part of totheark" thing, but honestly when you think about it there's no possible way Brian could have possibly orchestrated that series of events, like you almost have to interpret that as a baffling group of coincidences

[naomiknight-17]

Waiting for roof repair guy right now cuz guess whose roof has sprung a leak!!!!

[chirpsythismorning]

Realistically do you still think Milvn will breakup in the first couple of episodes? I feel like the fabdom is focusing on fanon so much at this point that they are missing canon and actual narrative on the show. It seems very unlikely to me for Mvln's breakup taking place in first couple of episodes. But the fandom are still stuk in their previous thoughts and cannot seem to think differently at all and never even consider the possibility of mlvn breakup happening way later on in the next season. Most of the Byler's analyses about El's character has turned out to be wrong. El doesnt seem to be done with the relationship. She still loves Mike (or thinks she does) and she drew strength from his monologue. A mildvn breakup right into S5 does not make any sense canon narrative wise. We can argue that the show was different that the script, while i agree with it to an extent i reaaaly think people are trying way too hard to discredit the writers intention and the script here. El was not angry at Mike. She was sad about Max and Hawkins' situation. 🤷‍♀️

What i am saying is that i feel like most Bylers are misinterpetating what is happening with the narrative here and it leads to unrealistic and baseless expectations for the characters and S5 regarding how Mlvn vs Byler will take place. And i am greatly sorry but i dont think Mike lied in his monologue, like at all. And the situation reads like "Mike loved el romantically but they wont be together bc of incompitability". El is not even still over Mike. And people expect her to be like "i breakup with you bye" right into S5. Mike still has underlining feelings for El. Like... all i am saying is people shouldnt base their expectations on headcanons and fanon misinterpretations.

Lastly, while i really would like a more detailed gay coming of age and sexuality storyline for Mike, realistically going by canon i dont think its happening. Sorry. They will mostly focus on Will's sexuality and coming of age it seems like and Mike will mostly have a "realization" arc where he realizes El and him are not fit for each other and then he decides to be with Will.

Based on the show’s trend of doing break-ups (or at least implied break-ups) early in the season, yes I do think it’s likely that the audience will at least have the impression that Mike and El are broken up early in s5.

That’s based on a technique they have done repeatedly, whereas the assumption that they will break-up midseason is based on what exactly? The Duffers saying that s5 is jumping right back into the action?

I mean, if anything shouldn’t that be an indication that the arcs heavily built up in s4, that were left deliberately unresolved, are going to be dealt with in a timely manner, as opposed to being put on pause and then squished into mid s5, when we’re arguably going to have even more stuff the characters are dealing with? Like, them literally fighting for their lives?

When it comes to Mike’s monologue giving El strength according to the script, this is actually really easy to explain and so I will! 

For starters, they did not disclose El's feelings about the monologue in the Piggyback script, bc they released it knowing it would go public, at least two years before s5 is set to actually come out. They would not just throw in a huge spoiler like that, seeing as it was intentionally left unaddressed in s4, with the intention to be addressed in early s5. That’s the whole thing about s4 kind of leaving things so shaky and uncertain, with s5 jumping us right back into that, bc there was just so much set up for all of those dominos to inevitably fall.

To understand Mike’s monologue and its impact on El better, it might help to recall the memory of El’s birth and how her mother’s love is what gave her the strength to defeat Henry the first time in 79’.

I mean look at the lighting of that scene, it’s probably the brightest fucking lighting we’ve ever seen in the entire series (you know what light means... pure, genuine, true love…). And it’s because strength from love is much more powerful than strength from anger. That’s something she is literally throwing back in Henry’s face that day of the massacre, going against what he told her to do and instead using the memory of her mother’s love to beat him. 

During Mike’s monologue, we see El using anger to give her strength to finally break free and stop Vecna, all orchestrated by events that Henry has had a role in impacting, meaning he was actively going up against her this second time, all while knowing that in order to actually beat her, she needed to be vulnerable and unable to use love as strength, with her only option being anger. And so what we see is anger about Mike still woefully misunderstanding what she had tried to explain to him earlier in the season, along with watching her best friend be murdered in front of her. And look at the lighting of that scene, she's literally seeing red. The atmosphere is eerily uncertain at best.

This monologue was SOOO necessary for the narrative in order to keep the public away from considering Byler. Because they already don’t want to consider it as it is, and that monologue gives them an excuse not to. You saw how they reacted to the piggyback script? Like it was this huge sigh of relief for them? Meaning that they were having doubts…

The thing is, I have considered the possibility of a mid-season Milkvan break-up. I’ve talked about how waiting until mid-season, something that would be unprecedented bc they’ve never done it before, would be odd considering we will be dealing with vastly different concerns and conflicts by that point. 

For them to hold off settling a break-up, that was built up all of s4 (arguably since s3), until mid-s5, would fall flat. If anything jumping right into the action means all the major stuff built-up, but left unaddressed in s4, is what we’re jumping back into.

They need to address those things so that they can move on to the aftermath of all of that and then beyond that. 5 episodes of ignoring that, and then 4 episodes of it happening and processing all of it AND dealing with endgame right as the finale is coming to a close, would be hard to juggle and make satisfying.

The reason they like this approach so much, is because it allows the audience to root for the other option in the love triangle. And with Will getting home-wrecker allegations as it is, a milkvan break-up is extremely necessary this time around as well, especially with byler being endgame and them really wanting us to root for them finally. 

How can we do that if the Duffer’s break their own trend of early break-ups and in turn make it difficult for us to root for byler, all while leading on milkvan’s unnecessarily even longer (with no intention of going that route), making it even more unlikely for viewers to accept Byler endgame?

They’ve been building up to this inevitable break-up since s3, with s4 ending in a way that made it sort of obvious El is not happy with Mike and with Mike clearly struggling with something.

Are we just going ignore the implications of the inevitable painting reveal or the fact that Mike called El ‘his’ superhero (the most insulting thing he could do honestly, least of all during a love confession) at the end of s4, and have that confrontation be stretched out? For what? El hasn’t even responded to it or told us her side at all? She told Mike she missed him and that’s it… That’s all we’ve got. Like, let her speak and actually say how she feels about their fight in her room and the events at Surfer Boy and everything leading up to this inevitable moment for them.

While Mike and El didn’t outright break up in s4, there was heavy implications of it, and that was for a reason. They wanted us to watch those Will and Mike scenes throughout the season and see something more. Even though it didn’t end with a kiss between them, nor them officially getting together, they still did it because they wanted us to interpret those scenes as romantic comfortably. That's also why they kept Mike and El seperate at the end of s4, because they wanted us to look at Mike and Will in a way that made us go 🫣🫣🫣 at the very least.

Now, if s5 is leading to Byler endgame, just imagine how much more important it is to make it really clear that Mike and El aren’t happening?

Another even more important reason to have break-ups early in a season in general, is to allow the overall season to have a vibe that is cohesive as it’s own entity. Major stuff happens at the beginning and major stuff happens at the end, with the middle making up the overall vibe and feeling they want us to subscribe to the whole time, with certain pairings being constant that time more than the end/beginning. It makes more sense for us to root for byler most of the season, the whole middle, and for the first time at the end now as well, while letting go of El and Mike early on, even if it’s ambiguous like it was in the previous season. Personally I think the prospects of a dump your ass parallel are high… (can we do something interesting and fun like speculate how the break up would go down? Will it be angsty? Will it be lighthearted? Like I want to see all of those hot takes bc that's actually something that is more fun to think about than the 'when').

I know some people are here because they love romances or love queer romances and just enjoy shipping in general, but I’m genuinely here bc Byler makes sense based on all that stuff you would probably consider to be reaching. That stuff is the best part to me. So, if you don’t like others doing that, then consider muting those that you deem as people ‘misinterpreting the narrative’, again, according to you. 

At the end of the day you can believe whatever you want to believe. 

This idea that it’s okay to tell other people they are wrong and have baseless claims, all while ignoring the actual evidence they are presenting… Like I mean this just comes off like Milkvan’s telling Bylers they’re delusional for considering Mike and Will as being a possibility at all. If you have to constantly use, it’s not that deep as your core argument after being presented with evidence, while only yourself giving maybe one or two reasons at most for why your interpretation makes the most sense, then you’re probably not actually open to considering things based on evidence. You want to believe what you want to believe and you're projecting onto others for not following along with it.

Especially when it comes to the whole Mike having a coming of age story or whatever, where some fans have tried to make the argument that there is nothing to support that, when that actually couldn’t be further from the truth. Bylers have provided heaps of evidence. If all of that is not enough for you, that’s something that you have to contend with at this time. Just like us believing what we believe based on evidence we’ve gathered is our concern and something we have to deal with, not you. No need to apologize! Just try to worry about your own interpretation of things and feeling confident in that, but without having to tear down others' because they don’t subscribe to yours interpretation of things.

Because I feel like it would honestly be a lot more humiliating to insist other peoples theories are wrong and they’re only going to embarrass themselves in the end, only for that person saying that to end up being wrong… Everyone is making theories and everyone is bound to be wrong about some or even most. That's okay. That's natural. That's sort of an unwritten part in the agreement we all agree to by participating in this theorizing in fandom experience.

When it comes to Mike again and his arc, I always say this, but it really comes down to this more than anything.

Finn is 2nd top billed among the kids. He used to be THE top billed among the kids for s1-3, but then he got bumped down behind Millie in s4. There is a major possibility, that Noah is going to be ranked up, with him going from being paired up with Sadie, under Gaten and Caleb, to be bumped up under Finn with them sharing a title card. Though it’s unlikely they would rank Finn down under Noah, who was not even in the opening credits of s1, while he was the first name that season and the following two, meaning Finn's character Mike needs to live up to that top billed spot right behind Millie. He needs to have an arc on his own that is equally as substantial as Will and El's arcs, and separate from them just like theirs will have aspects that are separate from Mike as well.

Because Mike was the protagonist of the first season, he HAS to be important again in a similar vein in the end for the show to work as an overall five part story. When people go back to rewatch after s5, they are going to be met with Mike front and center. That will only be satisfying if we get genuine insight into his character in the final season, beyond the surface level.

Quite honestly, ALL of the kids deserve something deeper than what you are implying for Mike, and so applying that to him, the og protagonist, is just so absurd to me. If anyone is going to come out with a surprising arc we’re not expecting, it’s Mike. The audience is already not expecting Will to actually get the boy, that's the aspect that they aren't prepared for for Will, and so what about Mike's unexpected reveal?

Literally most of the audience doesn’t even think there is the slightest possibility Mike could be queer. You don’t think that warrants some addressing and unpacking…? You know… because he never really unpacked…?

I feel like people hear me say Mike is going to be important in s5 and go oh so you don’t think Will is the main character?? And it’s like?? Honestly my answer is yes and no. I think Will is literally the spine, the heart, or whatever you want to call it. In Finn's own words, he is the reason that everything happens and he is the most important character arguably, because of how important he is in terms of all of these events taking place throughout the series.

However, Mike is at the forefront from the very beginning and we arguably see everything from his eyes in s1 and 2 more than anyone else. But that goes away in s3-4. And that felt extremely intentional based on what is about to go down (byler endgame). You can tell that by doing this, they are trying to lead up to a reveal that brings him back to his original place in the story for the audience to see him as his most authentic self again, and with answers for why we lost that insight in between.

I could count up at least 20 Easter eggs hinting at Mike being in danger/targeted, which goes all the way back to the first episode of the series. 

This isn't even considering, that another trend they’re likely to bring back in s5, bc if they don’t they’d be breaking a series long trend, is Mike being late. He starts every season late. And so, what is Mike going to be late for this time? Could it have something to do with all of the unknowns about him that are yet to be addressed?

I think that sometimes we say that something isn’t going to happen because we don’t want it to. A lot of this stuff I’m saying happening isn’t based on feelings, it’s based on actual evidence.

If you don’t want certain things to happen because of x, y, z, you can just say that is the case instead of making arguments that there is nothing supporting it, when that’s not actually true?

Like nothing? Nothing at all? Baseless? Like, be serious rn.

ST5 is very likely going to give off s1-2 vibes. While Mike is going to be less in the background compared to s3-4, Will AND El are still going to have equal, if not more attention than him, bc I do believe that their bond is what is going to also be a part of saving Hawkins.

The ending is going to be surprising bc those primary color-coded bitches are the answer to it all. If me saying that upsets anyone because it goes against their interpretation of things, I'm sorry too I guess!

[theultracharmingladynoire]

.