Inside Of Every Byler There Are Two Wolves...

Please reblog if you think that “they/them/theirs” is a valid set of pronouns.

this post must be reblogged by everyone

even though mike was scared, he walked up to will on the swings and asked him if he wanted to be his friend. and will said yes. that's the best thing mike's ever done and he did it scared. and with will.

something something mike may be scared but if he has will then things will be okay something something that's how he'll accept himself something something byler endgame

imagine the world if bylertwt wasnt afraid to acknowledge mike and el's dynamic and its importance to the narrative and how it's not just internalized homophobia that explains mike's actions

"will admits his feelings for mike but mike tells him he's not into him" *EXTREMELY LOUD INCORRECT BUZZER*

Y'know what THE byler song is for me?

It is absolutely 'Turning Out' by AJR. It's just so perfect for everything for them I'm telling you it's so them !!!!

I beg you all to listen to it because it is veryveryvery Mike Wheeler coded

The Strange Postponement of Mike and Will's relationship

If Mike and Will had remained as close as they were in Season 2 in the subsequent seasons, the "are they gay?" rumors absolutely would have spread among the General Audience, as they entered their official teen/dating/sexual awakening years.

There have been peculiar writing choices that seem to have no other explanation but to postpone romantic rumors about these two.

The show does it's damnedest to keep these best-friends-since-kindergarten apart once they enter puberty. The only interaction that possibly hints at romance in Season 3 is their virtual double date with Lumax where Mike is concerned for Will's well-being one time. This was necessary to reestablish their "good friendness" at the start of the season to set-up their breakup during the Rain Fight.

Then, of course, the Rain Fight happens. Mike says "It's not my fault you don't like girls." They effectively "break up."

But then there is the strange, interesting choice that there is no resolution ever about the Rain Fight. The apology for ignoring Will's D&D game comes from Lucas instead of Mike:

Will had his blow-up with MIKE, not Lucas! And we know that Mike absolutely was DRIVEN to apologize to Will, but we don't see it. Maybe he actually did, but it was offscreen. But why not have it ON screen? Why not clear the air on whether Mike thought Will was gay and was being homophobic to Will? Why not clarify THEN that Mike is a straight ally who supports his gay best friend, setting things up for Will to have a coming-out arc where he finds a love interest who is not Mike?

Instead, the writers made sure they had NO conversations for nearly all the rest of the season. They made sure Mike was focused on trying to repair things with El and blurting out "I love her." These two things together kept the Gay Rumors(TM) in check.

Season 4 then dramatizes how they'd GROWN APART -- specifically, how they don't seem to have stayed in contact and Mike seems to ignore Will.

What a strange thing for the writers to do! Mike and Will had been on good terms. That's because it was the start-of-season set-up for an ARC where they become close again.

Alright, so they soon repair things. But for what?

The Will Counseling Hour:

They literally have no conversations with each other where Will isn't comforting Mike and/or talking about El. To the extent that the GA was annoyed that Mike was "useless" and the California plotline was a "waste of time."

(Either the Duffers were bad writers or had a reason to spend so much time on the California plot. Hmm...)

The show was putting Byler in a holding pattern. The show established that Mike and Will were friends again, but with a "beard" on Mike: his relationship with El. Will's attempt to talk about anything ELSE -- like playing Nintendo and D&D -- was ignored as Mike worried about El.

The Will Counseling Hour ends only with their very LAST conversation of season 4, when Will shares that he can still feel Vecna. Mike becomes the Counselor: he resolves that they will beat Vecna. The bringing of these two together, along with signs that Mike and El are drifting apart, lay the trajectory for Season 5.

Season 5 will be the first season with Unfiltered Byler(TM) since Season 2.

EVERYTHING that kept the GA from thinking about the possibility of Byler, (1) how young they were in Season 2, (2) their being kept artificially apart and (3) Mike's focus on his relationship with El, will have fallen away.

For the first time since Season 2, the A Plot and Mike and Will being close ("a team") will mesh.

Meanwhile, we'll get Season 2 Mike because Will will also be the center of the story and IN DANGER. It's impossible to imagine Mike being his aloof start-of-Season-4 self. Add to all this Season 4 hormones: we're likely to see the heart-eyes romantic, Will-Voice-speaking boy in love we Bylers see in the 2nd half of Season 4.

And there's the Painting Lie, which the Duffers have told Finn Wolfhard will "pay off in the end." Mike WILL KNOW Will loves him, and loved him so much as to sacrifice himself for him.

Even if one doesn't accept Byler, one can't deny that there has to be a DIRECT RECKONING over whether Mike returns Will's feelings.

The entire structure of how the show has presented their relationship is building up toward this. The Strange Postponement of Byler had a purpose.

-teambyler

EDIT: You might enjoy my s5 speculations in "How the Duffers likely will make the general audience AWARE of Byler and CHEER for Byler" =D

Katarina turned to face him. "But Simon, you're not the only person who wants to help others. I'd say a fair number of people do. Most are simply too caught up in their own lives to spare the time or effort.

It takes a unique brand of lunacy to throw everything away and go marching on a mission – one that, in all likelihood, shall end with your death."

okk hear me out.....

Thinking about them again - I love when people depict them resenting the other for not rekindling their contact by calling first, while they were both also actively not doing that.

your honor i was just furthering the plot

I respect the hell out of this

alright. i'm taking it upon myself to put something to rest.

there is a new mlvn argument on the market, and i have to say, it is the absolute most BACKWARDS, IDIOTIC, WILFULLY IGNORANT take i have ever seen from them. and it is so easily disprovable that i need to make a post about it and put it in the ground early on.

if you've been around since s4 vol1 era, then you've seen the evolution of their arguments surrounding the monologue. first it was "mlvn was love at first sight, because mike said so". they were all posting the clip from s1 ep 1 of mike finding el in the woods, clips from all throughout s1, and saying "this mike was in love with el!!" because mike said so. in the monologue. when bylers pointed out that this claim from mike directly contrasts his behavior in s1, we were called delusional and told we were just coping. i was even told by someone on reddit that mike wasn't acting like he loved her because he was afraid of being made fun of by dustin and lucas, which deserves it's own separate post, but anyways...

after what finn said at the paris con, aka this:

bylers obviously took this as a win, because it very obviously completely dismisses the idea that mike was being truthful in the monologue. because of this, mlvn's argument has shifted. now, they are claiming that what mike said in the monologue, "I knew right then and there in that moment that I loved you." was not a lie, but HYPERBOLE.

here's just a few examples of this.

holy fuck. where do i even start with this...

i guess let me start by saying that i am an english major. i am a creative writing student. english language arts has always been my forte. it's been my best subject my entire life. i was the kid people went to for help in ELA (english language arts). i was the one tutoring my friends. i was the one explaining things to them. in college my friends would line up to get my help with their english work. i edited and revised their essays. i spent close to 10 hours a week in english classes discussing literary devices and analyzing different stories, which i excelled at.

i am not trying to 'flex', i am simply providing context as to why i believe my opinion on this is worth something. mlvns try to say being a writing/film student means nothing in this argument, but it really really fucking does. i, and countless others in the byler fandom, are LITERALLY more educated in this sort of thing than those who did not spend thousands of dollars to study it. sure we may not be renowned writers with masters degrees, but who do you think we learned from?? our professors, who ARE renowned writers with masters degrees. its no different than trusting the opinion of a biology major when talking about biology. of course ELA is more subjective and free, but when you actually study it you find that its more concrete than you'd think. there are definitions, there are guidelines, there are rights and wrongs. of course you do not have to obey those rules, but in the world of publishing and analysis there are things that make sense, and things that don't make sense.

for example. you can totally write a story where a character says "i knew right then and there in that moment that i loved you" and add whatever explanation or nuance that you want. you can write that with the intention of the character being truthful, but maybe exaggerating a bit. whatever you please. you have the creative freedom to do that whether it makes sense or not.

what you cannot do is claim that that phrase is a hyperbole in that context, or any context, because that is OBJECTIVELY wrong. that is incorrect and inarguable. there are phrases that could potentially be debated between those educated in ELA on whether or not it could be considered a hyperbole, but that would requite the phrase to have ambiguous wording. the phrase in question does not check those boxes. it is not ambiguous in any way shape or form. it's not hyperbole. it's not even hyperbolic in any way.

here's a link to an article with 50 different examples of hyperboles. i promise you that our quote in question will not be there, and that nothing on that list will be remotely similar to it.

"I knew right then and there in that moment that I loved you."

i mean you are genuinely a fucking doofus if you're genuinely trying to claim this is a hyperbole. i need you to be so fucking for real. mike is referring back to a specific moment, remember? maybe you don't because i know y'all don't even watch the show, so let me refresh your memory:

"But the truth is, El...I don't know how to live without you. I feel like my life started that day we found you in the woods. You were wearing that yellow Benny's Burgers shirt, and it was so big it almost swallowed you whole. I knew right then and there in that moment that i loved you. And I have loved you every day since."

el even has a flashback to that exact moment in the scene right after he says it, and right before he says "I knew right then and there etc..."

he literally starts it off with "The truth is"

not meant to be taken literally.

would it make sense to say "The truth is, I'm so tired I could sleep for a century." or "The truth is, I'm so hungry I could eat a horse." or "The truth is, I'm dying of laughter."

NO! IT WOULDNT!

mike's monologue was written/approved by the duffers. the same duffers who graduated from a very prestigious film school and created the biggest tv show in the world. they know what a fucking hyperbole is and that you don't preface one with "the truth is". it is genuinely ridiculous to suggest that they let that stay in a scene where a character is supposed to be finally revealing the truth to both another character and the audience.

let's circle back to those screenshots of dumbass mlvns cosplaying as ELA students

"i fell in love with you instantly" vs "i fell in love with you mere days after we met . ur arguing semantics when the point is that they fell for each other really fast"

please tell me, in WHAT fucking world does someone say "I knew right then and there [in the first moment I saw you] that I loved you" when trying to explain that they really fell in love a few days later. and in WHAT UNIVERSE would a WRITER choose to have their character, who is supposed to finally be telling the unfiltered truth, say that. the answer is, there isn't one. that is so fucking backwards and idiotic that i can't believe i'm even having to explain why. the monologue is fabricated. it was written and approved by professional writers and directors. if mike fell in love with el at some later point in s1, or realized it at some later point in s1, then he could've just fucking said that. he could've just told her the moment he fell for her or the moment he realized. they didn't have to make it all twisted and confusing for no reason. he has absolutely no reason to lie or exaggerate (if he is straight and in love with her).

DING A LING A LING A LING!!!!! THATS A BELL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"this feels like taking mikes words too literally"

oh, my apologies for taking his words literally during a fucking CONFESSION OF LOVE that he gave her while she was DYING. sorry for taking a line prefaced by "The truth is" literally. you are totally right and i will never do that again!

"when looking back on it it probably does feel like he loved her from the start"

cute sentiment, but that's literally NOT WHAT HE SAID. for the millionth time (see how i just used a hyperbole in a place where it makes sense? where i didn't preface it by saying it was the unfiltered truth?) he said "I knew right then and there in that moment that I loved you." he is saying he saw el in the woods in the rain in her yellow benny's burgers shirt, and KNEW he loved her. he realized it in that moment. that is what he wants el to believe. he is using specific language to pin point the moment he realized it on that moment. like im so serious when i say that if you try to say anything else you genuinely have worms for brains.

any way you logically look at this, it is crushing for mlvn. even if it was a hyperbole, which it is NOT, why the hell would the writers have him exaggerate his feelings to cater to her when it would be much more meaningful for his ACTUAL feelings to save her life?? why would mike feel like he needed to exaggerate?? and i'm sorry, i dont buy the heat of the moment bs. mike has nearly lost el multiple times because he kept lying to her. they had a bad fight days earlier because mike wouldn't tell her the truth. so he finally gets another chance to tell her the truth, and he EXAGGERATES?? HE TELLS A WHITE LIE??? that would also be crushing for mlvn. but none of that matters, because it's not a hyperbole, it's a lie. a flat out lie.

let be me clear, that does not make mike a bad person. in fact, it actually makes him an incredible, caring, selfless person. (remember the synopsis for s4 ep9? "With selfless hearts and a clash of metal, heroes fight from every corner of the battle field to save Hawkins ---and the world itself.") he lied because he knows he doesn't love el the way she wants and he feels like his actual love for her (which is platonic) would not be enough to save her. he devalues his own feelings because they are not what el wants. this is why he nodded after will said "It's scary to open up like that, to say how you really feel. Especially to people you care about the most. Because...what if they don't like the truth?" he feels like he owes el the love she wants, and he is willing to lie to her if it means saving her life. because he truly does love her and care about her, so much that he will do whatever it takes to not lose her.

and i know a lot of mlvn's devalue literary/media analysis and english/creative writing, and our opinions in general, so in case all that wasn't enough, i also asked mlvn's old friend about this. their friend being AI.

mlvns, everything with a lick of sense, including artificial intelligence, is proving you wrong. you are incorrect. what finn said at the paris con put the nail in your ships coffin and you know it. so please stop embarrassing yourselves on the internet and making dumbass claims like this when you know nothing about the subject. you look stupid.

this rant isnt just coming from a place of byler truther anger, it's english major anger. LEAVE MY SUBJECT ALONE. PLEASE.